J2Ski Forum Posts and Replies by ise

caron-a wrote:my physio has told me that spring snow is acl injury territory.
do you agree and, if you do, what's the reasoning?

He might mean the LGS (loose granular snow) which can make skiers make more twisting motions and you can get the ski breaking through the surface at times as well. Not a huge concern I'd say really.

What he ought to be talking about is falling better, has he mentioned this?

better still, this is packed powder at 4000m, just passage of skiers making it packed :



On the same day around 3000m it turns to spring snow, see how the skier is on the surface and the skis haven't really cut into the snow, this is why we call it "hero snow" sometimes :-)

Interesting, I knew that chemicals weren't added any longer but I'd not really seen much about this at all. I'm not even sure how it's done, the local cannons seem plumbed straight into the capture pools so what I thought were filters must include something to add these as well.

Trencher wrote:

ise wrote:
Whether people writing ski reports actually really understand and use the correct terms is questionable though, it's an amateurish affair at times and I doubt some of them understand the terms they're using.

It guess it wouldn't be great advertising to give real snow reports at times, so best to be vague all the time.

Does anyone know if resorts are adding stuff to artificial snow in Europe?
It makes a huge difference to how the snow changes during thaw freeze cycles. I know that my local hill use a bacteria treatment. I actually don't like too much real snow on my local hill as it ices up more easily and doesn't come back as well as the artificial stuff.

Answered my own question with google and it seems they do. Apparently there are concerns for alpine plants affected by the treatments.


Trencher

I'm surprised by that, what links did you find?

Packed Powder is dry snow that's packed by machine or skiers, not loose and your skis wouldn't break through, if you took them off then your boots would sink a little, you'd get resistance from a pole plant.

Spring snow or corn snow is large loose granules, these have frozen together overnight and then thawed during the day. They'll be cold enough to have adhesion and you'd get resistance from a pole plant and neither boots nor skis would sink. This is a developmental phase and as adhesion fails there's a transition to loose granular snow (LGS) as the freeze thaw cycle becomes established. This stuff (LGS) is hard to ski, you'll get little resistance on a pole plant and skis and boot would sink into the surface.

Whether people writing ski reports actually really understand and use the correct terms is questionable though, it's an amateurish affair at times and I doubt some of them understand the terms they're using.

When you click on the group owner it says :

Dave has no friends.

:lol: :lol:

Trencher wrote:

If I were buying another pair of Metrons, I would certainly consider Pavel's solution. As he says, it's only that strip of tin that makes mounting alternative bindings intimidating. Two things that I would consider first are, what type of skiing do I do ?, and is there an advantage to the standard Neox binding ?

If like me, you just use the Metrons for carving up the groomers, then the extra weight is less of a problem. however if you need to be light on your skis, then lighter bindings might be benificial.

For carving, the weight of the Metron/Neox combination seems to cut through just about anything. The rail mounted Neox bindings cope well with the dacambering that occurs in carving.

That raises an obvious point, I thought, along with Atomic as it happens, that the Metron and Neox were a system and designed for each other to give a package that skied in a particular way. What you say about it cutting through anything is pretty much the standard comment people who've skied them have and pretty much always the best feature people state. I thought it was blindingly obvious this is related to the weight of the ski and binding and just as obvious that this quality is lost when the weight it removed leaving you with a totally average ski or arguably not even that good.

As it happens, Atomic did lighten up the system themselves slightly over the years, they thought they'd got it as light as they could without compromising the performance of the ski. Apart from carrying the skis around then I can't understand why the weight is a problem, it does make the ski more predictable and ski better for most people, that is a fact and something the whole industry realises which is why Atomic aren't the only people making fairly heavy ski sets, it's noticeable at ski tests over the last few years just how heavy most skis are getting.

bandit wrote:

ise wrote:

In that case, I'm on a ski lift right now

Well okay, are you going skiing though )

Is the snow dome skiing ? I did do some jump turns in the scree though )