Previous :: Next Topic |
Author |
Message |
Pahoehoe Member
Joined: 12 Oct 2017 Posts: 563 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Pahoehoe
Member
|
Fri Jan 10, 2020 9:23 am
|
|
|
It's called recco. It has been around a while. Recco makes "reflectors" that manufacturers incorporate into outdoor clothing and gear.
Rescue professionals have a "detector" than they can use to search for the reflectors.
You can see them using it in this video. It's the big red thing that says recco on it.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Snowdog Member
Joined: 21 Jul 2006 Posts: 1027 | TRs | Pics Location: on (& off) the beaten path |
|
Snowdog
Member
|
Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:02 am
|
|
|
"Our understanding was avalanche mitigation with explosive charges had been completed off the top of Wardner Peak before skiers and boarders entered the then uncut traverse."
I find it deeply distressing that two slides occurred after explosive control work had been done.
'we don't have time for a shortcut'
'we don't have time for a shortcut'
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pahoehoe Member
Joined: 12 Oct 2017 Posts: 563 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Pahoehoe
Member
|
Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:17 am
|
|
|
Explosives dont guarantee anything. There are no guarantees in avalanche terrain except that in the right conditions, it will slide.
It's like slopes that pulls out after the third skier, or the tenth or the fiftieth.
No guarantees.
|
Back to top |
|
|
OwenT Member
Joined: 24 May 2014 Posts: 277 | TRs | Pics Location: Moses Lake |
|
OwenT
Member
|
Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:44 pm
|
|
|
Pahoehoe wrote: | Explosives dont guarantee anything. There are no guarantees in avalanche terrain except that in the right conditions, it will slide.
It's like slopes that pulls out after the third skier, or the tenth or the fiftieth.
No guarantees. |
Much like what was posted today by the UAC for the Salt Lake region of the Wasatch today.
"A notable avalanche occurred mid-morning in Little Cottonwood Canyon while the road was open. This slide occurred in the White Pine slide path and pushed a car off the road. Several things are notable about this slide. The path was shot with howitzer rounds before yet still produced an avalanche. UDOT shot the area with more howitzer rounds after the slide and didn't trigger any slides.
The take away is that even 105mm howitzer rounds are no guarantee, and there is always a certain amount of uncertainty when this much snow is falling. For us recreating the backcountry, we should give ourselves a wide margin of safety."
|
Back to top |
|
|
Schenk Off Leash Man
Joined: 16 Apr 2012 Posts: 2372 | TRs | Pics Location: Traveling, with the bear, to the other side of the Mountain |
|
Schenk
Off Leash Man
|
Tue Jan 14, 2020 1:56 pm
|
|
|
A concussion/explosion in the snowpack is not really "weighting" an un-bonded layer of snow. Certainly it will shock the snowpack, but doesn't add weight.
Snow on the downhill part of a loosely bonded layer supports the snow above it...a few pounds can trigger a slide when an explosion did not.
Nature exists with a stark indifference to humans' situation.
Nature exists with a stark indifference to humans' situation.
|
Back to top |
|
|
schifferj Member
Joined: 07 Mar 2015 Posts: 224 | TRs | Pics Location: 509 |
skiers triggered deadly avalanche
The Silver Mountain avalanche was investigated by the Idaho Panhandle Avalanche Center. It indicates that this event was as a result of a thin layer of "surface hoar" which didn't adhere to the layers of snow above and below the hoar layer.
"Snow science is notoriously complex, which made it possible for an avalanche to occur in an area that had been bombed and controlled by the resort, Thompson said.
“There are no fingers to be pointed from IPACs standpoint."
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bernardo Member
Joined: 08 Feb 2010 Posts: 2174 | TRs | Pics Location: out and about in the world |
|
Bernardo
Member
|
Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:01 pm
|
|
|
I generally believe that snow testing gives a false sense of security and should not be relied on, but the facts in this case seem to indicate it was negligent to not dig a pit. 1. There was known avalanche risk. 2. There was a weak layer. 3. The avalanche was easily triggered. 4. It would have been very easy to dig a pit and look.
If this was back country, it would be on the the skiers. As this was inbounds, I'd lean toward gross negligence if presented the case as juror. Even in buyer beware situations, there are limits on avoiding responsibility for negligence. The fact that the area was bombarded is proof they knew there was risk. As this thread has shown, it's common knowldge that bombardment cannot be relied on to eliminate risk. A pit test was the duty of the proprietor.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chief Joseph Member
Joined: 10 Nov 2007 Posts: 7677 | TRs | Pics Location: Verlot-Priest Lake |
Bernardo wrote: | I generally believe that snow testing gives a false sense of security and should not be relied on, but the facts in this case seem to indicate it was negligent to not dig a pit. 1. There was known avalanche risk. 2. There was a weak layer. 3. The avalanche was easily triggered. 4. It would have been very easy to dig a pit and look.
If this was back country, it would be on the the skiers. As this was inbounds, I'd lean toward gross negligence if presented the case as juror. Even in buyer beware situations, there are limits on avoiding responsibility for negligence. The fact that the area was bombarded is proof they knew there was risk. As this thread has shown, it's common knowldge that bombardment cannot be relied on to eliminate risk. A pit test was the duty of the proprietor. |
Interesting perspective. My question is, how accurate is a "Pit Test"? And if it is accurate in most cases, why would resort officials not dig one?
Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pahoehoe Member
Joined: 12 Oct 2017 Posts: 563 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Pahoehoe
Member
|
Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:52 pm
|
|
|
They knew that weak layer was there. That's why they didnt dig a pit.
Inbounds snow is a little different because skier compaction generally makes it a little more stable, plus it gets bombed and skied and ski cut and then tracked out before it snows again...
Trouble is that is part of the mountain was getting opened for the first time this season. Major red flag for inbounds avy potential.
Still, people want the freshies. They dont want to wait longer for the ropes to come down. While the ski community is sad about the lives lost in this event, I have heard little criticism of the resort for opening the terrain.
All they could have done is wait longer, and maybe bomb it again in the morning? But then what? Could a still slid.
How long do you want to wait for the ropes to drop?
Is it worth it? Carl, Scott and Molly aren't here to give their opinions.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chief Joseph Member
Joined: 10 Nov 2007 Posts: 7677 | TRs | Pics Location: Verlot-Priest Lake |
It seems to be Human Nature to try to find someone to blame when an accident happens.
Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
|
Back to top |
|
|
gb Member
Joined: 01 Jul 2010 Posts: 6303 | TRs | Pics
|
|
gb
Member
|
Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:37 am
|
|
|
Surface hoar is the most unpredictable snowpack layer as it varies widely in significance as it is being formed, how it is distributed before a storm, and how it stabilizes.
It's formation is governed by local humidities and windspeed (as in a depression or at the top of a low cloud layer) and local temperatures (affected by wind and inversions, sometimes quite localized.
It's distribution before a storm can be affected by solar effects and evaporation, and by the significance of wind in evaporating it, flattening it, or blowing it away.
It stabilizes best obviously when melted by temperature or sun, but also it depends on the size of the hoar crystals and the hardness of the layer it rests upon. If the layers above and below are soft, it will first begin to embed and then later likely be collapsed by the weight of overlying snowpack layers. If, however, it rests on a somewhat hardened layer, it cannot embed into that layer. Hence the layer above and below the hoar cannot really merge into one layer - they remain distinct.
Etc.
|
Back to top |
|
|
RumiDude Marmota olympus
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 Posts: 3580 | TRs | Pics Location: Port Angeles |
|
RumiDude
Marmota olympus
|
Fri Jan 17, 2020 4:06 pm
|
|
|
Chief Joseph wrote: | It seems to be Human Nature to try to find someone to blame when an accident happens. |
Well, whenever humans are involved in an accident it is generally presumed that at some point (or many points) along the way a human decision was involved in the prelude to the accident. It is at those points we turn our attention to figure out if someone made a poor decision.
Now some want to find the weak spot in the decision making so as to improve future decision processes. Others just want to wag their fingers at someone/s as if they were negligent/stupid, then proclaim that they themselves would never be so negligent/stupid.
But yea, either way it's human nature.
Rumi
"This is my Indian summer ... I'm far more dangerous now, because I don't care at all."
"This is my Indian summer ... I'm far more dangerous now, because I don't care at all."
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chief Joseph Member
Joined: 10 Nov 2007 Posts: 7677 | TRs | Pics Location: Verlot-Priest Lake |
Plus, sometimes it is simply an actual "Accident" and could not really have been prevented, despite what Humans might think because they want to CONTROL everything, and prevent anyone from ever having an accident or from being injured.
Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bernardo Member
Joined: 08 Feb 2010 Posts: 2174 | TRs | Pics Location: out and about in the world |
|
Bernardo
Member
|
Fri Jan 17, 2020 5:18 pm
|
|
|
My post above is not meant to be a definitive finding. But I do believe there is a case to be made for negligence and this will very likely be tested in court. If you run an outfit like this you probably want to avoid that risk.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chief Joseph Member
Joined: 10 Nov 2007 Posts: 7677 | TRs | Pics Location: Verlot-Priest Lake |
I doubt it would hold up in court, they could claim to have doe a Pit Test and there would be no way to prove that they didn't...also as I asked earlier, "How accurate is this type of test?".
Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
|
Back to top |
|
|
|