Latest posts for the topic "Respect The Conditions"

Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 09:12:58 GMT

There have been 2 deaths this week, in the moderately gentle, (for Chamonix) area of Le Tour. The second victim is British and has been found just off piste under a snowslide.
http://www.chamonet.com/whats_new_article.php?id_whats_new=6127&id_back=1

I watched a short video clip included in my regular emailing from Henry's Avalanche Talks this week, where Henry described being able to start a slide in current conditions "simply by coughing".

http://www.henrysavalanchetalk.com/

The recent intense cold has destabilised the existing snow base, and with the added weight of the new snow, has made for high risk conditions away from marked, secured runs.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 09:35:01 GMT

There has already been at least one death in Switzerland too. Conditions have been a bit critical with the amount of wind we've been having lately.

Last weekend I was on a lift looking at a slope of less then 30deg, Avalanche danger was 3, but there was considerable amounts of wind loading on it. This slope was directly under the lift and accessible without traversing. Under most conditions you'd think it should still be ok, but riding just beside the piste we saw the snow was really consolidated and slabby with a wind crust in places. We decided not to go on that slope.

The next run up there were two avalanches directly under the lift. One small one triggered by a boarder who managed to ride out of it. The second was further up and much bigger and was spontaneous.

Except for how slabby the snow pack was, and the seeing the wind loading from the lift we would have thought a slope of that gradient and exposure would have been safe.

Moral of the story... If in doubt DON'T go and respect wind loaded slopes no matter how shallow the gradient.

Just read that at least 5 people are dead in Italy within a few hours. Many of them mountain rescue workers. (Sorry link is only in German).

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:44:32 GMT

Another slide, this time in Anzere, Valais, 11am Sunday. Short report in French...

http://www.20min.ch/ro/news/romandie/story/Une-coulee-de-neige-emporte-deux-skieurs-25070702

1 person missing, one with injuries. The search continues with dogs. This apparently happened on a secured track.

Une des deux n'a pas encore ete retrouvee, alors que l'autre, souffrant de plusieurs blessures, a ete heliportee a Sion, a indique la police cantonale.

Une colonne de secours est sur place avec cinq chiens d'avalanche, a precise Markus Rieder, porte-parole de la police cantonale valaisanne, a la Radio suisse romande. On ignore pour l'instant si cette avalanche, qui est descendue sur une piste securisee, a ete declenchee par quelqu'un, a ajoute le porte-parole.

(ats)

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 13:33:05 GMT

Someone was recovered the other day after a long time (maybe Xmas eve) in Europe. They were found with a RECCO receiver not wearing a transceiver, as far as I gathered/can remember.

Something to think about when buying your gear.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 14:57:46 GMT

Pablo Escobar wrote:Someone was recovered the other day after a long time (maybe Xmas eve) in Europe. They were found with a RECCO receiver not wearing a transceiver, as far as I gathered/can remember.

Something to think about when buying your gear.

That is quite remarkable. The survivor must have been so fortunate to have an active Recco Search unit in the vicinity.

Can you find a link for this Pabs?

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 15:08:31 GMT

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=179820

There you go!

Edit,

Also here:

http://www.freeride.se/forum/thread.php?t=59434

I have a couple RECCO reflectors retrospectively attached to my boots, a quick Google about suggests they don't distribute them separately any more.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 15:51:10 GMT

Pablo Escobar wrote:

http://www.freeride.se/forum/thread.php?t=59434

I have a couple RECCO reflectors retrospectively attached to my boots, a quick Google about suggests they don't distribute them separately any more.

The headline is misleading, it's most certainly the first live recovery this winter but it's also to my knowledge the first ever live recovery of a skier, a pedestrian was recovered some years back but after a similarly long burial time. It's questionable the RECCO altered the outcome in either case. It's not very impressive after 26 years of use. It's a neat example of the problem with RECCO's, 20 minutes is a long burial time and your survival chances have dropped from 93% at under 15 minutes to around 70% and falling very, very quickly so by 25 minutes you'd be at 50%.

RECCO started out with all the best of intentions with the inventor having been involved in a personal loss, unfortunately it's never proved effective and has been used as a marketing tool by equipment manufacturers who sew the reflectors into jackets to identify them as being more technical than another similar products. I would suggest apart from this marketing use it would have died the death a long time back.

Right now the snow's unstable and poorly consolidated but not incredibly dangerous in the scale of these things, it's just holiday time and you tend to see these incidents a lot.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:23:18 GMT

ise wrote:

Right now the snow's unstable and poorly consolidated but not incredibly dangerous in the scale of these things, it's just holiday time and you tend to see these incidents a lot.

Chris Radford H.A.T wrote:
The local professionals are describing the current risk as a "high 3" rather than a "normal 3". This is because the risk factor is really "very considerable" in the locations described by Meteo France. This risk may be localised but it is very concerning and many of the pros have been taken for a short ride on a small releases triggered by their skiing activity.

This weak layer that has developed through the recent cold weather is quite widespread and looks deep. It was made worse by the cold weather and will remain under the snow pack for the whole season.

Here's why: there's a weak layer that is sitting under that new snow in many places at the moment. I, and all of my 'off-piste friends and colleagues', are very concerned about this layer (Wayne Watson from Alpine experience put it simply, "..the base is rotten!"). We're concerned because it can collapse with the weight of just one skier - that collapse can then release a slab avalanche under a person's feet or even on a steeper slope above them. Meteo France is warning about this layer.

The HAT guidance relates to French ski areas, and Henry Schniewind, has been giving Avalanche Awareness talks to skiers since the 1980's.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 17:14:26 GMT

There's not much achieved by trying to slice a particular risk level into sub-levels, it's sending entirely the wrong message. There were different national systems for categorizing risk levels and these were simplified to the five levels we've got today. The whole point of that was to give people in the mountains a simple way of assessing the dangers when leaving secured areas. There was, and still is, a body of thought that wanted to make this three levels like traffic lights. Inviting people to believe there's days with a "high 3", a "low 3" or a "medium 3" or an arbitrary number of sub-levels invites people to try and game the system.

For the record, 3 means

"Avalanches may be triggered on many slopes even if only light loads [2] are applied. On some slopes, medium or even fairly large spontaneous avalanches may occur."

in turn a light load is defined as :

light: a single skier or snowboarder smoothly linking turns and without falling, a group of skiers or snowboarders with a minimum 10 m gap between each person, a single person on snowshoes.

That's no more and no less than HAT described :

We're concerned because it can collapse with the weight of just one skier - that collapse can then release a slab avalanche under a person's feet or even on a steeper slope above them. Meteo France is warning about this layer

Which is just how level three is defined, the weight of one person can cause a failure.

There is a poor layer in the pack but that's obvious, it wouldn't be risk three if the pack was consolidated. The significance of the layer arguably isn't anything to do with day to day risk, it's highly questionable how long it's going to take clear which is the concern. Most high risk levels are associated with recent snowfalls and clear as the top layer consolidated with an already consolidated base, that's not happening and that's a concern.

So, right now the snow's unstable and poorly consolidated but not incredibly dangerous in the scale of these things, it's just holiday time and you tend to see these incidents a lot. ie, these incidents are a lot more to do with human factors than they are some quality of the current snowpack

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 17:26:08 GMT

I am sure at some time there was a first live recovery of a skier using a transceiver too ;)

I posted it more with reference to the skier being avalanched 'close' to the piste where most recreational skiers would think they were 'safe'. In this instance I would bet the having RECCO reflectors gives them a better chance than having nothing at all (again, like most recreational skiers). I am sure most people on j2Ski have just nipped off piste for a taste of powder without really thinking through the consequences (myself included).

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:17:05 GMT

Level 3 is level 3 but there is a range across the level. If this wasn't the case it would not be necessary to read the avalanche bulletin before heading into the back country. Regardless of what it says on the hazard map in my opinion reading the bulletin is also necessary, not just looking at the hazard map and thinking it will be ok.

Pablo Escobar wrote:I am sure at some time there was a first live recovery of a skier using a transceiver too ;)

I posted it more with reference to the skier being avalanched 'close' to the piste where most recreational skiers would think they were 'safe'. In this instance I would bet the having RECCO reflectors gives them a better chance than having nothing at all (again, like most recreational skiers). I am sure most people on j2Ski have just nipped off piste for a taste of powder without really thinking through the consequences (myself included).

If you are skiing on the piste then the chances of every requiring RECCO is pretty slim (but burials on the piste do occasionally occur), however if you go off-piste and think that RECCO is sufficient safety equipment you are seriously misguided. I have met loads of people who thought they were safe because they had RECCO in their clothing. They were pretty shocked to be told that it would be great when people are searching for your body!!! If you go off-piste there is no substitute for a transceiver (plus shovel and probe) and know how to use it.

BTW... for the record from what I can gather I can not claim to have anything close to the experience that Ise and Bandit have off piste. I'm just someone who likes to go off piste and am highly aware of my lack of experience so I do everything I can to get as much knowledge I can.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:24:36 GMT

You are missing my point totally. How many skiers go away and stick 100% to groomed runs, never venturing off the piste? At a guess, none. Therefore, the RECCO reflectors will without question be better than all the expensive equipment they don't have in a worst case scenario (slide on or very close to the piste).

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:33:47 GMT

Pablo Escobar wrote:You are missing my point totally. How many skiers go away and stick 100% to groomed runs, never venturing off the piste? At a guess, none. Therefore, the RECCO reflectors will without question be better than all the expensive equipment they don't have in a worst case scenario (slide on or very close to the piste).

No, I get your point. But don't necessarily agree. RECCO recoveries live are very rare. You are thought in any Avalanche course that to have any reasonably chance of survival you need to be located and dug out in less then 15 minutes (approx 90% survival chance). The ONLY way of reliably doing this is companion rescue with the use of a transciever.

RECCO gives people a false sense of security and very likely leads to people going into dangerous situations because they think they are suitably equipped because they have RECCO on their jacket. Therefore they are increasing their risk of an event happening, without having the necessary equipment or knowledge to increase survival chances if the sh!t does hit the fan.

Agreed, maybe its useful if someone is buried on or right next to the piste and people are quick enough to phone it in. But anywhere even just a little bit away from the piste its like playing Russian roulette.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:49:30 GMT

ir12daveor wrote:

Pablo Escobar wrote:You are missing my point totally. How many skiers go away and stick 100% to groomed runs, never venturing off the piste? At a guess, none. Therefore, the RECCO reflectors will without question be better than all the expensive equipment they don't have in a worst case scenario (slide on or very close to the piste).

No, I get your point. But don't necessarily agree. RECCO recoveries live are very rare. You are thought in any Avalanche course that to have any reasonably chance of survival you need to be located and dug out in less then 15 minutes (approx 90% survival chance). The ONLY way of reliably doing this is companion rescue with the use of a transciever.

RECCO gives people a false sense of security and very likely leads to people going into dangerous situations because they think they are suitably equipped because they have RECCO on their jacket. Therefore they are increasing their risk of an event happening, without having the necessary equipment or knowledge to increase survival chances if the sh!t does hit the fan.

Agreed, maybe its useful if someone is buried on or right next to the piste and people are quick enough to phone it in. But anywhere even just a little bit away from the piste its like playing Russian roulette.

Who knows that if having a RECCO on a jacket will give someone the confidence to get in to dangerous situations, maybe certain types of people but you can't really say for sure. Invariably it will be better than having absolutely no equipment what so ever should something bad happen.

At US resorts in bounds, many people have been killed by avalanches, I'd bet it is only a matter of time before some people are saved. Should everyone on piste carry transceivers? Probably yes, but it isn't going to happen.

I had other pictures/videos in mind but I can't be bothered digging them up just now.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:13:54 GMT

Pablo Escobar wrote:I am sure at some time there was a first live recovery of a skier using a transceiver too ;)

Quite so, just not 26 years after we started to use them )

Pablo Escobar wrote:I posted it more with reference to the skier being avalanched 'close' to the piste where most recreational skiers would think they were 'safe'. In this instance I would bet the having RECCO reflectors gives them a better chance than having nothing at all (again, like most recreational skiers). I am sure most people on j2Ski have just nipped off piste for a taste of powder without really thinking through the consequences (myself included).

Of course thousands of skiers have been doing just this for years without adverse outcomes by and large. But, it doesn't always work out, two teenage lads were buried here last year and one died, this was on a slope no more than 5 meters from the lift. It's a slope I've never skied, I know from a glance it's not a good place to be but they didn't have that skill and they didn't have any equipment, it needed several dog teams to find them.

One of the results of being here a few years now is that I can see an evolution in the slopes people are skiing and it's not a reassuring trend. People ski a few metres from the marked runs, then a few metres more and a bit more again and you start to see people in really dangerous places. On of the best illustrations I can give was some people here once who I know vaguely, Mrs Ise happened to see them and they just skied a closed run. She was pretty amazed given the conditions and asked if it was safe, the reply was it was closed as it hadn't been pisted. In fact, a large cornice hadn't been cleared as they couldn't fly a helicopter that day to bomb it. Fatter skis, the internet raising expectations about off-piste skiing, a false sense of security from transceivers or RECCO's even all contribute to that.

As for RECCO's near the piste, imagine the detector is in the lift station at the bottom, how long do you think it's going to take for someone to notice, then get it, then take it where it's needed? Do you really fancy those chances? The incident in Valmorel tells you it took them 20 minutes, it's a long time to be buried, any longer and your chances of survival are no better than a coin toss.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:16:18 GMT

Pablo Escobar wrote:Who knows that if having a RECCO on a jacket will give someone the confidence to get in to dangerous situations, maybe certain types of people but you can't really say for sure.

No, we can say that for certain, it's a hugely well researched area of behavior. We're all guilty of it really.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:29:10 GMT

I don't disagree, I'd just guess that loads of people have RECCOs in their ski boots/jackets/trousers and don't have a clue what they are there for. You are probably right in that there will be very few cases where someone will be saved using RECCO unless something happens with the technology soon. I did read that the RECCO detectors were getting smaller and smaller but remain too big to carry about.

Unfortunately the coin falls on tails more often than heads :twisted:

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 20:23:47 GMT

ise wrote:There's not much achieved by trying to slice a particular risk level into sub-levels, it's sending entirely the wrong message. There were different national systems for categorizing risk levels and these were simplified to the five levels we've got today. The whole point of that was to give people in the mountains a simple way of assessing the dangers when leaving secured areas.

Henry's Avalanche Talks provide a very comprehensive service to skiers and snowboarders, in person, through DVD's and by regular emails.

I believe that they are pretty experienced at interpreting the Meteo France data, and making the information readily accessible to the holidaymaker.

If their team are concerned enough to make a public statement about precisely how they see the conditions, then, if one person takes heed and avoids mishap, would that be worthwhile enough for you?

Re:Respect The Conditions

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 21:09:09 GMT

Pablo Escobar wrote:I don't disagree, I'd just guess that loads of people have RECCOs in their ski boots/jackets/trousers and don't have a clue what they are there for. You are probably right in that there will be very few cases where someone will be saved using RECCO unless something happens with the technology soon. I did read that the RECCO detectors were getting smaller and smaller but remain too big to carry about.

Bear in mind this is the perfect clarity of hindsight ) RECCO has been around for 25 years or so and it's not worked out too well. I thought it sounded a great idea personally, maybe 15 years or so back I'd get new RECCO's if I got new boots and stick them on. Sometime over those years I've learnt a bit more about snow and realized that RECCO hasn't worked too well in practice.

RECCO have a thing called the White Book (http://recco.com/avalanche/safety.asp) which is well worth a look and there's a movie, their advice is pretty clear, if you're away from the piste you're going to need a transceiver. Even then, I'm not very impressed with the state of skiers with transceivers and their use, it's pretty obvious to me that people are spending too much time agonizing over which transceiver to buy and then comparing them to work out who is a couple of seconds quicker finding a buried rucksack and nothing like enough concerned about route selection and understanding the conditions under their feet.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Mon, 28 Dec 2009 00:40:50 GMT

ise wrote:

Pablo Escobar wrote:I don't disagree, I'd just guess that loads of people have RECCOs in their ski boots/jackets/trousers and don't have a clue what they are there for. You are probably right in that there will be very few cases where someone will be saved using RECCO unless something happens with the technology soon. I did read that the RECCO detectors were getting smaller and smaller but remain too big to carry about.

Bear in mind this is the perfect clarity of hindsight ) RECCO has been around for 25 years or so and it's not worked out too well. I thought it sounded a great idea personally, maybe 15 years or so back I'd get new RECCO's if I got new boots and stick them on. Sometime over those years I've learnt a bit more about snow and realized that RECCO hasn't worked too well in practice.

RECCO have a thing called the White Book (http://recco.com/avalanche/safety.asp) which is well worth a look and there's a movie, their advice is pretty clear, if you're away from the piste you're going to need a transceiver. Even then, I'm not very impressed with the state of skiers with transceivers and their use, it's pretty obvious to me that people are spending too much time agonizing over which transceiver to buy and then comparing them to work out who is a couple of seconds quicker finding a buried rucksack and nothing like enough concerned about route selection and understanding the conditions under their feet.

Agreed, there aren't any substitutes for knowledge and experience putting your skills to practice. Oh, except the Ortovox S1!

Jokes :lol:

Response from HAT on the use of the term "high 3" to describe the avalanche risk factor.

Tue, 29 Dec 2009 13:18:41 GMT

Response from HAT on the use of the term "high 3" to describe the avalanche risk factor.

ise makes a valid point that the risk level was clearly a 3 on the day that we reported on. The conditions did meet the criteria for level 3 as accurately described in your posting.

I would also accept your point that sub slicing the risk factor can encourage people to second guess the experts and this may be risky.

So why did we do this in the ezine?

One of the criteria for differentiating between a risk level 3 and risk level 4 is whether the risk is localised or widespread. On that day, the professionals on the mountain judged the risk to be at the top end of localised and looking really quite widepspread.

We coupled this with the fact that off piste skiers with less experience of making these judgements, can view level 3 as "medium" (which it is not). This idea that 1 is safe, 2 is low, 3 is medium, 4 is high and 5 is dangerous is a worrying and dangerous concept that we are continually trying to warn against. Our use of the term a "high 3" was to provide an additional warning to casual user of these ratings.

On this day we felt the risks were high enough to justify an additional warning about the likelihood of triggering a slab avalanche and that risk existed in many places especially above 2300m.

Any other comments on this very welcome. I will also be posting this commentary on our blog http://www.getoffpiste.com

Chris

Re:Respect The Conditions

Tue, 29 Dec 2009 13:25:16 GMT

Hi Chris welcome to J2ski :D Thanks for stopping by and clarifying your rationale, it's much appreciated :D

Re:Respect The Conditions

Tue, 29 Dec 2009 20:01:42 GMT

Local news have reported the on piste avalanche in Anzere, Valais as having been started by 3 skiers off piste. The slide then caught up two skiers who were on piste. The 3 who caused the avalanche are being sought by Cantonal Police.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Fri, 1 Jan 2010 16:13:11 GMT

Henry Schniewind from the HAT team was on a lift in Le Fornet, Val d'Isere today and captured some iphone images of a skier setting off, and getting caught in an avalanche.

http://www.getoffpiste.com/2010/01/my-entry-1.html

Re:Respect The Conditions

Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:59:20 GMT

Interesting topic. I would not trust a RECCO further than I can throw it. I have only seen a couple of upper lift stations with RECCO detectors, and I reckon even getting those deployed will take too long - except to locate a body.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Tue, 29 Jun 2010 23:52:51 GMT

colinstone wrote:Interesting topic. I would not trust a RECCO further than I can throw it. I have only seen a couple of upper lift stations with RECCO detectors, and I reckon even getting those deployed will take too long - except to locate a body.

So would you say if an avalanche occurred over a pisted area that it was not worth having the recco available to give any skiers caught in it, a chance. Have you read anywhere that recco could replace transceivers off piste? I don't think that is the intention. You could use the same argument to say that they might as well stop training search dogs, or that probes aren't worth carrying. Recco is just another tool. It's a great idea for areas where the risk of an avalanche is a very remote, but always possible (on piste/inbounds), or for finding people off piste, who should have had transceivers.

Re:Respect The Conditions

Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:29:32 GMT

That is indeed scary. An advice to all skiers and snowboarders out there - Make sure to check on the snow condition of the ski resort you're heading to before departure. You must be aware of its snow conditions at all times.