Printable View
Saw this on the GNFAC site. Really could not have gone any better for those involved. Rapid, decisive action by the unburied parties, with a dig-out in less than 4 minutes. Video doesnt show a lot, but what it does tell you can speak volumes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1i9y...u5XMSL&index=1
skier #1 looks like he schussed across a suspect slope while skier#2 waited till he got across. good. had skier #2 stayed right in skier #1's traverse/cut track, the slope may have stayed put. wonder if he even thought about or knew to think about how he should proceed.
rog
Would have, could have, should have. Who knows. I had a slope slide when I took one step down onto the traverse track.Quote:
Originally Posted by icelanticskier
Yeah, my thought too. #2 guy's lucky to be alive, I thought he got strained through trees. Must have sustained some trauma. Sobering footage.Quote:
Originally Posted by icelanticskier
Oh I do hear you, but hey - this is armchair QB-ing right? It looked to me (from my excellent vantage point here on my couch) that the slope was weakened by the first skiers track, and that the second guy set off the wedge of snow between the 2 tracks that gained momentum and led to the big fracture (kind of like when you stomp on a switchback). I think had guy #2 stayed in tracked, this may not have happened the way it did. But, hey I could be wrong :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jethro
With the propensity for everyone and their dog to have go pros, wonder if we'll see lots more of these in the future?
glad it all worked out. learning different (appropriate) ways to move about the mountains is just as important as learning about the snow safety/science aspect of mountain travel. an important phenomenon that is often overlooked/not learned/trained. as soon as i saw skier #2 moving from the beginning i knew this must be a newer/less experienced snow slider. kinda all over the place/unsteady on his skis. no ones born knowing this stuff and takes time and mindfulness. dragons don't like erratic behavior. wakes them up. learn to be smooth and light. the dragon may snort a bit, but hopefully keep on sleeping..........
rog
Kinda like "I'll just out run it".Quote:
Originally Posted by icelanticskier
It's always hard to tell from gopro footage, but didn't that seem really low angle? What was the snowpack doing that day?
who knows.. but they seemed to be skiing somewhat aggressively and with little regard for instability.
I am pretty sure this is in the same drainage that the Dozen More Turns incident occurred.
We have had a lot of snow and winds the past week.
Glad it worked out.
is that terrain mostly all semi open/semi treed with lots of benches/rollovers with very easy access?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunion
seems like it could def lure folks in that may place much trust in what makes up the terrain in there. kinda anchored, kinda not.........
rog
That "yeah, dude" at the beginning when they regroup made me shudder.
You see 10 seconds of shaky wrist mounted footage of a traverse and jump to the conclusion that buddy hasn't got a clue? Not with you on this one.. Also not so sure staying in the traverse track would've made any difference at all. Looks to me like the initial fracture is a good ways above him. In any case, just thought I'd chime in with my own brand of wild and unsupported speculation.Quote:
Originally Posted by icelanticskier
FFS.
Good job by his partners.
I'm impressed they found the go-pro.
Glad everything worked out alright. At least around here (Whitefish), conditions have been really variable from location to location for the past couple weeks.
i remember a slightly younger and significantly more naive me once thought that skiing in trees meant no avalanches. this is an example of my ignorance.
it may have made the difference considering that skier#1 crossed without incident. with skier#2 making his own cut track, he hit the weak spot that caused the slope to fail above him. just conversation. doesn't hurt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solesides
rog
Agreed, totally. I think the question is whether he hit the bull's eye, so to speak, or further weakened an already compromised slope and pushed it past threshold. Skier one could have very well initiated a series of fractures on that layer, but perhaps they didn't propagate rapidly and release like the slab did for the second skier. We've all read or heard about involvements when, say, the fifth skier who drops in is the one to trigger the slope. Did they hit the sweet spot that everyone else missed, or were they the straw that broke the camel's back? From a materials engineering perspective, the comparison I use is this: leaning a piece of wood up against another and stomping on it to try to snap it in half. Maybe you give it one good hard kick and it doesn't crack, but you've stressed it and weakened it considerably; the strength of the bonds have been compromised. Next stomp, maybe it doesn't even snap yet. Maybe then the third time's the charm and it fails. Fracture character can be difficult to get a handle on and reliably assess, never mind its use in accurate forecasting, predication etc..Quote:
Originally Posted by icelanticskier
tricky stuff fo sho. personally, whenever i'm leading out across a suspect slope with another/others in tow, crossing one at a time to a predetermined spot/zone, my last request/intruction is always to stay RIGHT in my track. there's a reason we cross one at a time. to put the least amount of weight/impact/stress on the slope, so why test another line above/below if the 1st one worked? not saying that the one track won't cause the slope to fail for the second/third person tho, anything can happen. it's also pretty aesthetically unpleasing to make multiple hacks across a slope when just one line is sufficient. we don't skin next to each other. one track is broken. no reason to have a traverse be any different. i know, i'm anal:)
rog
Quote:
Originally Posted by icelanticskier
The terrain IS mostly all semi open/semi treed with lots of benches/rollovers, the area is permitted BLM land that a guy who volunteers for us runs a "Yurt" skiing operation on.
Been quite a few close calls over the past few years in the area. Access is difficult.
The area tends to build a snowpack with many PWLs and is subject to intense precip. events that push the hazard from Mod. to Cons.+ in a 24 hr period.
It is worth emphasizing that if you are traversing a suspect slope, or a slope that is steep enough to slide, it is always best to stay exactly in the same track, rather than each skier go and hunt for a trigger point. If a short slope traverse is not even part of your ski line, rather just a movement to reach your ski line, why not do everything you can to minimize the probability of triggering?Quote:
Originally Posted by icelanticskier
bunion, thank you:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunion
rog
I'm with rog and neck beard on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by neck beard
The one time I was involved in a slide involving a traverse across a suspect slope, I tried to follow in the track before me. As soon as I stepped into the track, the slope below me slid. I have no hard and fast rule in this condition now. Why is more weight on one area better than the same weight spread out.Quote:
Originally Posted by neck beard
Is the stress applied to on point one a slope cumulative?
v.s.
Multiple stresses over a wider area on the same slope with a greater chance of finding a thin/weak/trigger point?
Very few people get to continuously test this to the point of having a conclusive data set of results. I don't, that is for sure.
So...
I'd be interested in hearing form a patroller who blasts a control route.
If a small charge produces no result:
1. do you keep blasting that same point with the same strength charge?
or
2. do you increase the charge size, but continue to blast on that exact same spot?
or
3. do you place a charge on different parts of the slope until you get a result (or not)?
I've never worked patrol, but if I had 3 small charges to control a slope, I'd blow them in different places across the slope, rather than throw them all in the same spot hoping that perhaps cumulative stress (if it exists) will eventually overcoming the strength in the target weak layer. Perhaps I'd fail my job interview with that opinion. Guess I'll soon find out. :)
did just the slope below the track slide, leaving you ok where you were? or did the slope's failure below you pull you down including the area of the track? if the former, it looks like following the track was the right decision/move.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jethro
rog
1. No you move on to the next shot placement.Quote:
If a small charge produces no result:
1. do you keep blasting that same point with the same strength charge?
or
2. do you increase the charge size, but continue to blast on that exact same spot?
or
3. do you place a charge on different parts of the slope until you get a result (or not)?
2. Unless you really suspect deep slab weakness and are trying to produce a slide, see answer 1.
3. yes, but the idea is to test, not ruin skiing,
Forget about the hand charges.
When we do a/c work and are trying to hunt for weak spots or pockets you don't put a track across the same line as your partner.
Generally speaking you mirror your partners cut but about 10-15 feet uphill or downhill.
That said, I think that slope would have failed whether he stayed in track or not.