There is a new website for RECCO. There is lots of interesting information on their new website.
Check it out at http://www.RECCO.com
Printable View
There is a new website for RECCO. There is lots of interesting information on their new website.
Check it out at http://www.RECCO.com
there's a cool video on there under "avalanche awareness" - good info and also some pretty gnarly shots of avalanches
Recco is worthless if only good for recovery. Waste of resources and energy IMO.
Can't agree more.Quote:
Originally Posted by DasBlunt
Recco= Recovers Extremely Cold Corpses Occasionally.
Some of their marketing could actually increase deaths as some people don't understand what they are getting.
I have snowmobilers working for me who think they have clothes with " them built in avalanche beacons".
It might be helpful to consider the facts before you decide whether or not RECCO is worthless.
RECCO is a great technology that is neither designed, nor marketed, to replace a transceiver. I do not believe that any of RECCO's marketing materials are misleading in any fashion whatsoever.
Anyone who believes that RECCO constitutes a "built in avalanche beacon" is experiencing a serious failure of basic common sense. RECCO is not designed to improve common sense; RECCO is designed to reduce burial times for individuals who aren't wearing avalanche transceivers, and it works brilliantly.
( I am not affiliated with RECCO. )
Facts? There's never been a live recovery in the US with a RECCO - that's a fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by CookieMonster
None of their marketing materials are misleading? Probably true. But how about the morons that work in half the big-box ski retailers? Those douche-gabs mislead people every fucking day about it.
Case in point: Conversation on chairlift this weekend.
Future Popsicle: The snow is awesome over in Estelle.
Me: Patrol just closed it because of slides.
FP: I don't have to worry about that.
Me: Huh?
FP: I have a beacon.
Me: Are you skiing with friends who have them too?
FP: Nah, don't need to. Patrol has the thingy to find me - see, there's the sign in their window - I have the beacon in my pants.
Me: You might want to go into the patrol room and ask them about that thing.
There have been live recoveries in Europe, and I think this speaks to the value of RECCO as more than theoretical. ( Paging Hacksaw for statistics. )
That people lack common sense doesn't reduce the value of RECCO any more than it reduces the value of transceivers, shovels, or probes. The lack of a single live recovery in the US is not a black mark against RECCO.
( Your post doesn't consider other data, such as the number of RECCO searches performed, and whether or not there were other factors in those accidents. If you don't have that data, and can't find it, you might try asking Hacksaw. )
Would you also suggest that avalanche fatalities among those wearing transceivers constitute a black mark against transceiver technology?
I'll say it again: anyone who believes that RECCO constitutes a "built in avalanche beacon" is experiencing a serious failure of basic common sense. You'd have had the same conversation with the Future Popsicle if he had been wearing a transceiver. Let's assume a RECCO search is conducted by ski patrol... is that somehow worse than a probe line?
For christ's fucking sake, plug in your toaster.
From Recco's website.
"Reflectors are also not a substitute for an avalanche rescue beacon. However, when someone needs more help than their friends can provide, RECCO® reflectors do provide another chance."
Another chance at what.?--- there's marketing bullshit right there.^^^^^
" serious failure of common sense"'.... yea right... I think you are overestimating the IQ of the general population level there Cookie 'ol buddy.
Well ... I usually do the exact opposite ( but in a fair-minded way )!Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotsman50
I definitely don't think that RECCO technology is safe or effective for backcountry search and rescue in the event of an avalanche if a live recovery is desired ... but RECCO technology is unquestionably a better search tool than a probe line. At a resort, having a reflector could definitely improve the chances of a live recovery from zero to much better than zero.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotsman50
Then If they have any corporate morality they should put the following in big fucking letters right in the middle of their website and on all clothing that carry them.Quote:
Originally Posted by CookieMonster
NOT SUITABLE FOR BACKCOUNTRY USE
Yes, it should be made absolutely crystal clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotsman50
I just believe it is a waste of resources. All these mountains could be spending money on beacon basins, more patrolers.
Recco could be putting money into R$D into better beacons, larger search area receivers for beacons, special locating machines for people without beacons in resorts.
Its marketing and fancy machines....not protecting people, only a false sense of security.
I would love to see the stats as I am basing my opinion on the USA data of no living recovery.
Didn't seem to help that poor girl at the bird a few years ago. When they got it over to the slide and they picked up one million signals from everyone there trying to help find her. I think the thing is shit until I hear a reasonable reason why it isn't.
I say, with What the Don posted above, FUCK Recco. Is that harsh? Not sure, but if she had that on, and 200 other people had it on, and they can't find someone, WASTE OF MONEY AND LIVES.
^^^^^^ DasBlunt; Already posted by Sinecure above....are you only reading your own posts???? Pay attention!
Wait a second.Quote:
Originally Posted by DasBlunt
RECCO reflectors don't trigger avalanches, so it is impossible to connect a RECCO reflector to any fatality. It's definitely not the reflector's fault that a girl died, and her chance of rescue was higher with RECCO than without.
Since RECCO is a better option than a probe line, I guess I'm still not sure why the technology inspires such anger.
Plenty of people have died despite wearing beacons, and I don't see this type of anger directed at beacon manufacturers. If everyone at a ski area wore a beacon, you would have the same search problem.
But people could all switch to receive, they CANNOT with RECCO.Quote:
Originally Posted by CookieMonster
I am being harsh to see the extremes of the argument. You are being logical in your defense of a reasonable idea of resort safety. But, it does not seem to have any statistical benefit over wearing a beacon, other than padding the pocketbooks of recco and manufactures in China. Someone else I am sure has a better offense against Recco than mine.
Dale came on and posted this, RECCO has not had many, if any, live rescues even in Europe, or they are keeping them pretty secret.
"I am Dale Atkins with RECCO AB (we're a Swedish company), and over the past few winters there have been some writings about RECCO: some good, some bad, and a lot somewhere in between. I would like to give some accurate information about our system, but first I would like to introduce myself, give a brief answer to Mtsprings’ questions, and respond to eight common myths about RECCO.
I am the training and education manager or North America. Prior to that I worked as an avalanche forecaster and researcher for the Colorado Avalanche Information Center for 19 years. Along the way I have had 30+ years of mountain rescue experience and 20 years of professional ski patrolling. As a rescuer I have dug out enough bodies (starting in '74) to fill a bus. As a researcher I have formally investigated hundreds and hundreds of avalanche accidents; co-authored the 4th volume of The Snowy Torrents. Currently, I am writing the 5th volume (to be published next fall) of The Snow Torrents -- US avalanche accidents from 1987 to (maybe) 2007. Besides RECCO and other things, I also serve as the vice-president to the Avalanche Rescue Commission of the International Commission for Alpine Rescue. Professionally, I have worked with and around avalanches since the early 1980s.
To Mtspring:
The RECCO System is not a substitute for a transceiver (see myth 1 below); however, our system provides pretty decent security at most of the avi-prone resorts in North America. At most resorts RECCO is now part of the first response, this was not true even a few years ago. Reflectors (should always have two) integrated into clothing, boots, helmets are better, but adhesive-backed reflectors -- sold in pairs -- are available from mountaingear.com. Keep in mind that no device -- transceiver, RECCO, airbag, AvaLung, etc -- guarantees survival. Even with transceivers mortality is about 50%, and this year it has been much worse. RECCO reflectors provide a basic and inexpensive rescue system, but knowledge most important. Take the time for you and your kids -- like some of the writers posted -- to get educated about avalanches, always buddy up when riding, and also visit and talk with patrollers about conditions too. Just like in the backcountry, this winter has served as a tragic reminder that some days are better than others to visit steep terrain.
Here are some common myths about RECCO.
1. RECCO replaces the transceiver.
FACT: RECCO supplements the transceiver. We want and encourage people to get and learn how to use transceivers. The beacon is the best tool for companion rescue. RECCO is a system when someone needs more help than their friends can provide.
2.I already have a transceiver, I don’t need RECCO.
FACT: Even experienced skiers/riders forget to carry or turn on their transceiver. We are human and thus fallible. RECCO provides a basic, simple and inexpensive rescue system for all: from newbies ignorant of avalanche dangers (therefore will never have a transceiver) to the super-experienced and savvy who makes a mistake.
3. RECCO adversely affects avalanche rescue beacons.
FACT: No. The two systems work on very different frequencies and cause no interferences. In fact the Barryvox VS 2000 Pro transceiver (sold in Europe) has a RECCO reflector inside the beacon. RECCO’s new detector also has a beacon receiver, so one rescuer can do both jobs.
4. I can just put a RECCO reflector in my pocket.
FACT: Please don’t. The adhesive-backed reflectors are designed to work best when attached to hard-shell boots or helmets. With soft-shell snowboard boots the reflector can also be placed in between a boot shell and liner. Simply dropping a reflector into a pocket can dramatically reduce system performance. Reflectors integrated (on the inside or outside) on jackets, pants, boots, helmets, body protection are specially designed and placed for this application. We also recommend that people wear two reflectors.
5. Gives a false sense of security.
FACT: Some people will use safety equipment -- including beacons -- as an excuse to engage in riskier actions. How many of us -- myself included -- have skied a steep slope with pretty suspect instability just because we wore a transceiver and were with good friends who carried big shovels? Education is our best defense and RECCO works hard to motivate people to get educated about avalanches.
6. Organized rescue is too slow.
FACT: Organized rescue is getting faster because: A. cell phones B. helicopters C. proximity D. new search technology
Organized rescue has gotten much faster in recent years; however, rescue teams are still stymied by having to use probe poles to find about half of all buried victims. A probe pole is like using a needle to find another needle in a haystack. Today’s search times (in the US) by organized rescue teams are only slightly faster than avalanche search times (time spent searching) in the 1980s. When the results of the few avalanche rescue dogs cases are removed, the times are nearly identical. Transceivers and RECCO can search areas in minutes that can take hundreds of rescuers many hours to probe. Rescue dogs are much slower, but still many times faster than a probe pole.
The best example of a fast rescue occurred last April in Colorado when a cornice collapsed beneath a snowshoer. She was buried with a hand out but could not be seen by her companion. A 911 call sent a helicopter with rescuers who found her, evacuated her to hospital, and returned to search for her companion before he was even able to reach the avalanche debris.
7. RECCO only finds dead bodies.
FACT: RECCO finds people, dead and alive. Every year we find a few people alive (in Europe), which makes them and their families pretty happy. For years RECCO was used in the secondary (or later) levels of a search. When used one, two, three days (or later), it’s no surprise RECCO found dead bodies, but an interesting trend was noticed. Once the detector arrived on scene the searches were taking only minutes.
8. Too few places equipped with detectors.
FACT: Worldwide more than 600 rescue bases are equipped with detectors. In the US and Canada we have equipped about 120 resorts (click here for a list). Many more organizations, especially SAR teams, in North America are slated for detectors.
I hope I have provided some answers and information. If anyone has questions, please contact me by PM or via recco.com. Thank you for taking the time to read this message."
Think Snow,
Dale Atkins
RECCO AB"
In reality, I think this would be difficult to implement in a short time frame.Quote:
Originally Posted by DasBlunt
I have absolutely no problem with harshness or arguing ( You should come on over to Turns-All-Year sometime. Things get pretty harsh and argumentative and fun until the mods have had enough. ).Quote:
Originally Posted by DasBlunt
Anyway, I'm simply curious about why RECCO has inspired the harshness in the first place. It's not as if they set out to do something bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CookieMonster
Generally with a VERY large voice yelling at you (which I possess), people will switch to receive quickly.
Your last comment; its simple. A false sense of security and lack of training.
Some person buys the latest boots with Recco and he fails to read a/the book, look for the signs, and drops into his local bowl in the spring and gets caught in a inbounds avy, missing sign after sign. Or, same example, and the person goes into the sidecountry and thinks they are safe. Or, same person thinks they are good in the Backcountry.
Here is a quote from the RECCO Wikipedia page:
"The system was originally developed for use at ski resorts where it is already recognized to be extremely valuable for ski-resort-based rescue teams and ski patrols. However, its value is not confined only to ski resorts. Even in the backcountry RECCO has demonstrated its capability to find buried victims quickly."
I bet 20 bux Dale wrote that. No offense to Dale, but doesn't anyone see a problem here?
Cookie.... The reason I feel so harshly about Recco is that they do a very bad job of educating their buyers about the limitations of the system or policing the advertising done by the clothing manufacturers and retail outlets that sell them.
I am basing my opinion on real life experiences of being in stores and hearing store clerks telling people that the clothing has built in avalanche detection systems... not once ... many times and different stores. Maybe factually correct but no further information on their limitations.
I've sat on chair lifts at my local hill Crystal and probably twice a year heard somebody taking about how they have avalanche stuff in their clothes and they can go into the BC with it.
I've got people I work with who snowmobile in the BC and erroneously believed they had the equivalent of a beacon in their clothing until I set them right.
Ask DALE the Recco rep why they do not mark the clothing that uses their system with a tag that says NOT FOR BACKCOUNTRY USE.... simple and cost effective..... why do they not do it???
This being the USA, I just hope that somebody sues them and when they get a $20 million dollar law suit against them... then maybe they will do the right thing and make sure their vendors and licencees correctly mark their product.
Also, ask Dale if they are still making separate recco tags that people can put on skis, iphones and dogs etc . Be tragic to spend 15 mins searching and digging in avy debris to discover a ski with a recco tag on it and not a human.
Are they still selling those..... ask him.
RECCO= Reluctant to Explain Correctly in Case profits Obliterate.
From some user's review of some pants with Recco on backcountry.com site: "good pockets and piece of mind of the Recco reflector. "
From some site called nationaloutdoors.net in their review of an REI jacket: "The REI Shuksan Jacket is backcountry shell that has it all. The jacket was designed with the backcountry traveler in mind. It features the super breathable eVent fabric along with a RECCO Avalanche Rescue System reflector permanently sealed to the inside right sleeve."
From a site called gearbuyer.com reviewing some marker pants:
"Skiers who prefer backcountry conditions will appreciate the RECCO technology which uses a reflector and detector to pinpoint your location for faster avalanche rescue."
See how morons might get the wrong idea?
Excellent stuff Sinecure ^^^^^ exactly the problem.
What say you now Cookie my buddy?
I think they stopped selling them (at least they're not on backcountry.com anymore), though it would be pretty cool to offer such a thing with a (drastically) different frequency reflectivity to put on gear, like the dog transmitter SOS used to makeQuote:
Originally Posted by Scotsman50
...and Sincure owns this particular RECCO is stoopid thread.
Thanks for all the replies. Yes, I can see how morons would get the wrong idea, but morons get the wrong idea about all kinds of things, including avalanche beacons and iPhones with "avalanche software". The RECCO reflector is superior to a probe line, and despite the product reviews and information posted above, I simply can't see why anyone thinks people are worse off with reflectors than without.
Yes, I am well-aware that there is a belief among the participants of this thread that the presence of a RECCO reflector will lead certain individuals to take bigger risks. Unfortunately, avalanche safety equipment has this general effect, along with helmets and climbing ropes and fatter skis. Certainly snowmobilers made for the mountains enable people to get into far more trouble than RECCO reflectors.
The fact of the matter is that failing to properly use most backcountry skiing equipment can lead to serious injuries and death, and a lot of backcountry ski equipment can lull us into a false sense of security. RECCO isn't any different, and I don't think it should be subject to special scrutiny.
It would be great if someone from RECCO could provide some data here. As I mentioned, I am not affiliated with RECCO, so I don't have any answers to some of the questions here, and I can't respond to the comments in any useful or conclusive fashion.
I think you are just being obstinate and defensive here Cookie.
We are not deriding the technology or that they may be of some benefit in the right circumstances within a RESORT ( at least I'm not).
The harshness and critiscm is directed to the way RECCO markets and allows the clothing vendors to market their product and that they do little other than weasely fine print to deter the perception that they can be useful in the BC.
Cookie - I'll stand you a beer if you'll go into a big box sporting or department store and can get a completely accurate and frank explantion of a recco clothing item that they carry from the closest sales person following your posed dumb gaper enquiry. No cheating now!
They act as a stupidity enabler far more than they act as a better alternative to a probeline.
I'm swayed. ( ... who are you calling obstinate!!! ;) )Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotsman50
LOL, well that sounds good, but I agree with your post as well. All the good intentions in the world don't amount to very much if the buyers receive poor information during the sales process.Quote:
Originally Posted by PNWBrit
I can definitely agree that, in conjunction with poor information, the RECCO tags could indeed serve as a stupidity enabler. Obviously, this isn't supposed to happen, but I agree that it does happen.
DasBlunt invited me to this party (and I am glad he did), but in reading the thread I think I might be getting in between a dog and fire hydrant. Good thing I have a raincoat.
As I wrote in my post from last winter, I do work for RECCO. Before RECCO I worked for the Colorado Avalanche Information Center for nearly 20 years. I have also been involved in mountain rescue since the 1970s, and pro ski-patrolled for 20 years too. In all of these years I have participated on average in more than one avalanche rescue a year and as an avalanche researcher have investigated hundreds and hundreds of accidents.
Let me start with a few RECCO themes: 1) RECCO reflectors do not replace transceivers, 2) The RECCO System is a tool for organized rescue teams (ski patrols and mountain rescue). 3) RECCO reflectors have a place for all -- from novices to experts – in ski areas, sidecountry or backcountry.
Who should use reflectors?
I suspect most all of us use transceivers. How many of us have forgotten our transceiver or forgotten to turn it on? (I have, and more than once.) If you say you would never make this mistake, you haven’t been skiing/riding long enough. In this situation, RECCO becomes a backup, even for experienced riders and avalanches nerds like us. Every year very experienced people forget their beacons or chose not to take one (Colorado last winter, Utah this winter). At the other end of the spectrum of riders are the avalanche ignorant, which are a lot of people. If people don’t know about avalanche dangers, they don’t know that they need to get educated and equipped with beacons, probes, and shovel. RECCO reflectors provide a base level of security whether it’s the expert who forgets his or her beacon, or for the ignorant (who often are very good skiers or riders).
A beacon is the best tool for friends to find friends. Beacons also work well for rescuers to find people (and this happens every winter). But every winter 1/3 to 1/2 (depending upon the country) of all people buried and killed in avalanches don’t have beacons. A probe pole is a very slow way to be found. (With a probe pole a single rescuer can search about 50m^2 per hour. A trained rescue dog searches at about 5000 to 10,000m^2 per hour. With a transceiver or a RECCO detector a rescuer can search about 60,000m^2 per hour.)
Where should reflectors be used?
The setting –- in-area, sidecountry or backcountry – for RECCO reflector use is irrelevant because a reflector does not replace a beacon. The problem is when someone doesn’t have a beacon. The goal of any rescue is to find someone fast, no matter what method is used, whether it’s beacons, RECCO, dogs, which are all way superior to a probe pole (probe line). Rescuers will almost always respond quicker to the sidecountry than the backcountry (but not always). A 15-minute response by rescuers is great until it takes 10 hours of probing to find someone. In the backcountry a 10-hour search benefits few people. But when the search only takes 15 minutes even if it took 1 or 2 hours for rescuers to arrive, organized rescuers can make a real difference.
In the US in the last 10 winters 2% of buried victims survived longer than 5 hours. Why not use technology that allows rescuers to search faster? Sure these people are lucky, but at least having a RECCO reflector allows you to be in a place to be lucky.
False confidence?
The issue of false confidence/false feeling of safety that RECCO reflectors might provide is really important to us, and we work very hard with brands and retailers to educate their sales staff. Yes, some sales people say the wrong things. Twenty to thirty years ago sales people also said the wrong things about beacons. One of the funnier stories was that beacons could be used by Denali climbers on a glacier to find crevasses. To this day, however, some sales people continue to say, “A beacon will save your life.” This statement is false. The US statistics show only 39% of buried victims equipped with beacons survive. Scary.
We try to contact people that were found because of RECCO and so far none have said they chose to make riskier decisions because they had reflectors. The usual responses are things like that’s where their friends were going, or they had been there before and never had problems. It’s just like the scores of people that venture into the same spots, but with nothing.
All rescue devices (beacons, reflectors, AvaLungs and airbags) can sometimes cause false confidence. And all of us have been or are guilty of this. Think about it that next time you put your beacon around your neck, buy an airbag, or an Avalung. These are all excellent devices, but if you think they offer a shield to protect you, you or your relatives will be sadly disappointed.
Finding people
Beacons and RECCO reflectors find people; neither devices guarantees survival. In fact the survival stats with beacons poor. If buried with a beacon, more people die than survive. In the last 10 years, despite beacons getting much better, the mortality rate of people buried with beacons is increasing. It’s up to 61%. There should be no doubt that the beacon is the best tool, but it doesn’t replace good judgment. When dealing with avalanches even very skilled people, making good decisions, can still have bad outcomes.
Every winter in Europe, typically a handful of people are found alive because of the RECCO System. These people and their families are pretty happy because they got a second chance. Some day, and I hope sooner than later, the same will happen here in North America.
In the past couple of years RECCO has found a handful of buried victims in North America. Tragically, the victims had died. Conditions like trauma and multi-day Alaskan storms did not help. Two of the victims were not avalanche victims but lost skiers in tree-well type accidents.
A rescuer’s perspective
If as a rescuer I was only concerned with how people were found in the past, I would use only probe poles and probe lines. Probe lines have saved far more lives than avalanche rescue dogs and RECCO. (The last person found alive in the United States by a trained avalanche dog was back in 1994. In more than one-third of rescues dogs failed to find buried victims. In Europe the figure is much lower.) However, I am not concerned with how people were found in the past. I am interested in what I can use today and tomorrow to find people faster and that’s why we as rescuers use beacons, the RECCO System, and dogs. If you were buried, wouldn’t you want us to use every tool?
Thank you for reading.
Dale Atkins
RECCO AB
Dale - would you think it fair to say that at least 75% of your product's purchasers fundamentally misunderstood the purpose/function/capabilities/limitations of recco when they bought your product and for many that misunderstanding was reason for purchase. Evaluating that with risk perceptions of beacon , airbag or avalung purchasers is ridiculous.
That cheap misunderstanding has to alter peoples behaviour.
I know that Scotsman would be happy to host a phone conference for you to educate his snowmobiler employees if you'd be willing.
Hmm...I can't say a hard number, but yes a significant number of purchasers probably misunderstand our product, but the number that actually bought the product because it had a reflector is very small. I have personally talked to hundreds and hundreds of folks that have reflector-equipped gear. Many folks don't know they even had a reflector (which I think is a good thing). Most folks bought the product because they simply liked the jacket, pants, boots, etc. Very, very few say it's because of the reflector.Quote:
Originally Posted by PNWbrit
Trying to figure out why people do what they do is almost impossible. Ask 5 behavioral economists and you'll get 25 different answers. Last winter my rescue team spent 2 months chasing an avid backcountry skier who had a Personal Locator Beacon (PLB) and thought it was an avalanche beacon. He'd turn on whenever he started down a backcountry slope, then he'd turn it off at the bottom. He got it as a Christmas gift but never read the user's manual. A lot of shop folks and individual users never read or watch our materials too.
I would very much like to talk with Scotsman and his staff. Please have him PM me or contact me via info@recco.com. If any retailer would like more info or would like to chat, please contact me.
I'm going to go with CookieMonster on this one. All this shit leads to a false sense of security, why single out RECCO? Does it ever occur to anyone that if you are using a flux line pattern to find a submerged human being, they are seriously fucked in the neck? Yet I see posts around here all the time that suggest beacon ownership is a prerequisite for snow riding with someone else, as though it conveys some halo of security. I'll take someone with snow sense and no beacon over some fucktard with a new Tracker2 100 times out of 100.
I guess I don't get the RECCO bile, either. There have been universes of refinements since they invented the Skadi over 40 years ago? Why not let RECCO evolve before we take a big deuce on it? And even if it never evolves, what is the issue with it existing as another slim margin of survivability?
What's the point in arguing with him? The guy gets paid by RECCO. He's not going to put his paycheck and career in danger by telling the truth and he's obviously willing to compromise his own integrity by repeating the party line when his intellect MUST tell him that the RECCO dogma he is repeating is suspect to say the least. ( there is no other rational explanation).
Answer one question: don't deflect to the "message".
Dale: why doen't RECCO insist that every garment manufacturer using a RECCO detector MUST have a tag on it( produced by RECCO) explaining how the system works, it's capabilities and limitations and clearly marked ( since you won't agree to NOT SUITABLE FOR BACKCOUNTRY USE) that says" THIS IS NOT AN AVALANCHE BEACON" or something similar... very simple, cost cents. RECCO then insists, if you want RECCO on your garment, you must display tag or we won't sell to you.
Do that and the problem that I and many others have with RECCO simply evaporates. If the person buying the garment doesn't read the tag... that's their problem.
You admit that "a significant number of purchasers that buy your product misunderstand it" and go on to say you "think it's a good thing."... I understand the intellectual argument you are making in that regard but WOW that's some corporate mission statement right there! Can't think of many business models where a company would be proud of that. Usually the reverse is true on both counts and companies spend significant money and time to make sure that purchasers "fully understand" their product and think " that's a good thing."
Thanks Scotsman. You own this thread now with a perfect point. Joe Strummer makes the best universal point, and I agree with him and CM and end my rant against Recco, but I would like to see something like what Scotsman says below implemented. Just a tag on the recco that has to be removed with all the information and warnings. A significant number is one too many IMHO. Beacons, shovel, probe without education is the same shit. I have climbed Mt Shasta, done multi week summer backpacking tours in Desolation Wilderness area, and now am getting into climbing and BC winter travel. I would not even step foot into winter BC unless I am ready. Most people don't work like this, but I do. I am not the market for Recco, clearly, but some sort of information must be stated about what actually Recco is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotsman50
Hey Scotsman, never said I (or RECCO) was proud that a lot of folks don't understand our system. We do spend a lot of money and effort to educate folks and to motivate them to get educated about avalanches.
I do get paid from RECCO, but there is more to the story than me simply getting a paycheck. I actually first saw and used a detector back in 1987. It was right after I was the accident site leader for a 3-day search for 4 sidecountry (called it out-of-bounds back then) skiers buried and killed outside of a Colorado ski area. The debris covered nearly 24 acres. On one day we had over 400 people probing; another day saw over 300. Back then the detector weighed 35+ pounds and worked slightly better than VW van trying to pull a travel trailer over the mountains, but the detector and the system worked. For the next 20 years I kept my day job as a forecaster/researcher with the state of Colorado, and I volunteered time to RECCO, because I believed in the product and knew what it could do. Finally in 2007 I joined RECCO and got a paycheck.
On to your question.
Let me answer your question, but first I bet it has been awhile since you looked at the hang tag that is on EVERY (100%) RECCO reflector-equipped product. Here are a 2 pics from a tag used a couple of years ago. Notice what the red strip says. This year's tags are white and red, and right on the tag it says, "This location technology is not a substitute for the transceiver." When you open up the tag we give a brief description of the system in seven languages.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotsman50
http://i1090.photobucket.com/albums/...e/IMG_0573.jpg
http://i1090.photobucket.com/albums/...e/IMG_0575.jpg
Also, about 90% of the brands ALSO use an inside tag that is permanently attached to the product. Like the outer hang tags, the inside prominently says, "The RECCO System is not a substitute for the transceiver." The tag also gives a very brief description of the system. Here's what it looks like.
http://i1090.photobucket.com/albums/...inside_tag.jpg
We try very hard to inform and educate. We have to. The consequences of an avalanche can be terminal. At some point, however, it becomes the user's responsibility to become aware of what they have. As you wrote, "If the person buying the garment doesn't read the tag... that's their problem."
Dale
RECCO AB
Dale.
Those tags are WAY too much like a promo for RECCO. It reads like you are still selling the product. Way too positive/ like a sales pitch and not enough reality in those tags IMO.
And furthermore, I feel like none of us are bashing it for fun. It's only warnings in our minds, questioning something about the RECCO ideal, which is hard to pinpoint, but the flags are still there about how to make it safer and better. On one hand people are working towards better snow safety, like you Dale. On the other hand, some people see a false sense of security and are passionate about not misleading the sheep.
Glad you made it back over Dale.
The unfortunate reality is that the type of language you suggest is about as effective as the dire warnings on cigarette packs and picture of pregnant mothers on alcohol containers. It simply does not work, and it has very unpleasant side effects such as convincing people NOT to read the material. If people don't read the material, then we're right back at step 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by DasBlunt
DasBlunt, here's a cool exercise: you could write a post containing what you believe constitutes effective language. It's very tricky, but I think you're a pretty smart fellow. Can you do it in the same number of words as used on the current tag?Quote:
Originally Posted by DasBlunt
Dale: Thank you for your reply and let me start for apologizing for my statement about your motivation for defending RECCO. That was unfair and you obviously take avalanche safety very seriously and your volunteer work is commendable.
In addition I went and looked at all my RECCO equipped garments and found tags in two of the three garments I own as you describe so you OWN this thread and I am incorrect and guilty of the very accusations I was making. I am a moron and despite my embarrassment, when I'm wrong ... I need to own up to being wrong.
I've had a bee in my bonnet about RECCO for several years ever since hearing a store clerk tell me about the avalanche beacon in the jacket I was looking at and recently when trying to give the 20 or so avid snowmobiler's who work for my company some avy education at a company safety meeting I organized because I was horrified to hear about some of their weekend exploits and lack of avy savvy. During that session, I was aghast as I listened to several of them tell me they had avalanche beacons in their clothing and had bought the clothes for that very reason but were unaware of what RECCO was. Obviously the very tags I was complaining about being omitted where there in the (presumably)majority of their clothing with RECCO and if they didn't read the tags so be it. I've been blaming the wrong people.
However that is no excuse for getting my basic facts wrong and for that I apologize yet again.
It still disturbs me that a significant number of the purchasers who buy your product misunderstand it but I guess that's their problem if they are not willing to find the tags and read them.
Scotsman50, I appreciate you listening. Thank you.
I try and RECCO tries to educate folks, and we'll keep pluggin' away at it. It's also good to know that you take this seriously, too. We all have to, especially if we want to keep playing in snow.
I am calling it a night. If you, or your staff, or anyone out there has questions, or thoughts, please give a shout.
Happy trails.