J2Ski Forum Posts and Replies by ise

Ian Wickham wrote:
Each too his own but I don't have any real ambition to visit any of those resorts apart from Grindelwald which I will possible visit next year, and ise my friend you do not have to visit the resort to know that it is expensive. :wink:

apparently you do :) you've not been and think it's expensive, when I worked in France I lived in the area so I can tell you for a fact it's not. Unless you can think of a different explanation I think the reason I know that is that I've been.

tino_11 wrote:
Haha, thats Pablo told )

Not really ) He asked if Wickers had been, it seemed to me the answer was no, a comparison with somewhere else he'd not been isn't very useful.

We had a flat in St Gervais, part of the Megève area, for some years and it's a great ski area. Probably one of the most underrated areas in France with access to some other areas if you've a car, Chamonix of course but also Praz sur Arly and so on. The area's not especially expensive, there's some extremely expensive restaurants but there's some pretty cheap ones as well.

goff wrote:
Freezy with those twigs stuck to your toes a minor slope seems like major event.

yes, alpine only skiers do tend to underestimate how difficult nordic is ) the skis are a bit thin to balance on once you're moving and I've got the fischer "wide body" skis which are a huge 50mm or so underfoot :lol:

goff, how much busier do those areas get over the weekends?

Trixi wrote:sounds like somebody knows a lot about trancievers.. i've got an Pieps any information bout the diffrence and whats better?

which sort of pieps is that? there's been several models. The newest is the DSP with an LCD screen and there's a freeride model which is an odd little thing.

I wouldn't get caught up in what transceiver is better than another. There's only one main distinction you can make, and that's how many antenna the transceiver has and if it's digital or not.

Traditionally they had a single antenna and the basic operation was to tell you how strong the signal was using lights and sound, the Ortovox F1 was probably the most popular model but there were others. It tends to be that these have the greatest range., as much as 80m for reception in the case of the F1 in favorable conditions. These were analogue devices.

There were a couple of digital single antenna devices, in this context digital means instead of displaying purely signal strength some processing goes on and you get direction indication.

Next along were devices with two antennas, this allowed some clever signal processing so they have an LCD or LED screen given direction and distance readings. The best known was probably the BCA Tracker DTS.

Now we have three antenna models and yet more clever signal processing. So something like a Mammut Pulse is able to distinguish between multiple signals for multiple burials and has some other clever tricks like sending biometric data indicating when the transmitting device stopped moving and if there's life signs.

Along with adding antenna the evolution has been to use faster chips to do the processing, some users have found older models hard to use as there's processing lags from time to time. That's generally exacerbated by them waving the transceiver around like they're on Star Trek though.

Various tests show predictable results, more modern transceivers are very slightly quicker in most users hands, an experienced user of the old F1 can generally beat even newer devices though. That's probably for two reasons, first, the F1 has around double the range so you don't need to box search for first signal and second, they've been around a long time and some people have 20 odd years experience with them. The tests also show some devices are slightly quicker than another but the differences aren't very significant. Other differences centre around multiple burials which is a contentious issue, but three antenna devices tend to do better here and some, like the Pulse, have special features.

Personally, we have Ortovox F1's, DTS Trackers and Mammut Pulses, I tend to mostly use the Pulse personally day to day.

Very quiet round at Mont d'Or this morning, I assume no one else had the heads up from goff that the second release of todays snow report had Mont d'Or as open when the first one at 0800 didn't :)

So there was me and one other car in the car park although the road was not in a great state which may have stopped some people, as I was leaving I had to avoid a couple of people near the bottom having some problems even though they had chains on.



These shots are on the Tétras red circuit which was mostly deserted, I only saw one other guy all day apart from snow people on snow shoes in the distance at one point.













Still nice and cold but sunny and once again above the cloud we're getting down in the 3-lacs area.

hold on.... I've posted this in the wrong country :oops: my phone was still on a Swiss network but it's definitely France :roll:

that's sneaky, they've updated that in the last hour :) I looked earlier and it wasn't open.

we're below the cloud here but it might be clear there, the webcam at Métabief looks good :

http://www.webcam-ski.com/interfaces/orex_metabief/interface.php?pk_interface=239&m=images&r=panoramique

I've spent a lot of time in the Stubai and it sounds like it would be what you're looking apart from getting accommodation near the lift. There are a couple of hotels up by the lift of the main Stubai area but they're expensive and most people stay at villages strung out along the valley. There's a ski bus running up and down very frequently and you just hop on, personally I think it's fine but I know people get a bit fussy about these things. Neustift is a good place to stay in my experience.

If you can I'd fly to Innsbruck though, it's way closer than Munich.