Romeo, Onufer Missing in GTNP

[icelanticskier]

^^^^^^^^i do hear that.

rog

[wooley12]

I hope you do.

[CookieMonster]

funneh that the incidents involving the very popular/experienced don't get talked about here much. yet those that get killed and have little to no experience get scorned and ridiculed. should be the other way around don't ya think?

rog

If this is what actually happens, it's not surprising at all. Human behaviour 101.

Sent from my Paranoid Android using TGR forums.

[jserra17]

Just going on the limited facts available: highly experienced skier/mountaineers, epic day trip, skin track up intact for portions of the couloir - right where it should be, out of harm's way where possible. It is believed they were still ascending when it ran. Their bodies were located 100's of meters apart.

We will never know whether or where they dug a pit or pits, what the pit(s) showed or whether their separation while traveling was reasonable. However, based on those facts, I'd bet they dug a pit down low and were going to do another up high, that they were ascending intelligently, moving from safe zone to safe zone and that when it went, it propagated beyond what they anticipated. When you climb a couloir like that, you are exposed.

[Tye 1on]

Just going on the limited facts available: highly experienced skier/mountaineers, epic day trip, skin track up intact for portions of the couloir - right where it should be, out of harm's way where possible. It is believed they were still ascending when it ran. Their bodies were located 100's of meters apart.

We will never know whether or where they dug a pit or pits, what the pit(s) showed or whether their separation while traveling was reasonable. However, based on those facts, I'd bet they dug a pit down low and were going to do another up high, that they were ascending intelligently, moving from safe zone to safe zone and that when it went, it propagated beyond what they anticipated. When you climb a couloir like that, you are exposed.

Based on what 'facts' other than what you are fabricating or guessing? You 'bet' they dug a pit? Shut the fuck up until you actually KNOW something.

Edit- nobody will know all the facts, and there may well be lessons to be learned from this tragedy, but you are clueless.

[icelanticskier]

never really agreed with the whole "climb what you ski" thang for many situations. i'd rather climb up a less exposed route, then manage risk/hazards from top/down.

i'da been a gone'r a few times over had i climbed what i skied.

rog

[jserra17]

Based on what 'facts' other than what you are fabricating or guessing? You 'bet' they dug a pit? Shut the fuck up until you actually KNOW something.

Edit- nobody will know all the facts, and there may well be lessons to be learned from this tragedy, but you are clueless.

Every fact listed in my first paragraph is easily verifiable with ten minutes on-line research. Those facts support the limited inferences I offered. I am sorry you don't care for my opinion, but my point remains the same: even experts doing everything right are at risk. I didn't criticize, didn't blame and don't believe I gave you cause for incivility.

[Garbanzo]

Dear Steve — A Letter to Romeo

My questions we will never have answers and I don't need them any more.
Well done Lou.

[bodywhomper]

what does, "doing everything right", mean?

i do not see the correlation between this:

Just going on the limited facts available: highly experienced skier/mountaineers, epic day trip, skin track up intact for portions of the couloir - right where it should be, out of harm's way where possible. It is believed they were still ascending when it ran. Their bodies were located 100's of meters apart.

and your inferences:

they dug a pit down low and were going to do another up high, that they were ascending intelligently, moving from safe zone to safe zone and that when it went....

alternatively, "highly experienced skier/mountaineers" who live in the area and spend most of their time in the snow could say, "we're committed, we feel confident, and this thing should be good to go for the next few hours, let's get the fuck up this things ASAP." in other words, "let's not dig a pit down low or up high or carefully move from safe zone to safe zone, because it increases our time on this exposed line and will take too long to allow us to accomplish our objectives."

[jserra17]

Yes, possible and I didn't know either of these gentlemen so I don't know what they would have done. With hindsight one could then opine that not digging a pit was a mistake - it might have yielded enough information to change or call off the mission. If so, that decision was tragic.

It seems that this (Slide Zone) forum has become highly dysfunctional. As of this week, we have 30 dead in avalanches in the U.S. At this point, an honest discussion about avalanche risk and intelligent decision making is appropriate, if not absolutely necessary. Yet, in every thread, any suggestion that applying a disciplined decision making process might have avoided a tragic outcome is met with howls of protest. Those processes are taught by AIARE, AAI and their Canadian equivalent - all of the professional avalanche education organizations in North America. I find it ironic that in this case my suggestion that the victims had followed those protocols has lead to still more protest. It's as though suggesting that someone followed safe procedure is an accusation that they abandoned some unwritten code of hard-core backcountry skiers. If that colony of backcountry skiers and riders is so sure they are right about their approach, why the extreme sensitivity? If those people really think they are safer by not digging a pit and performing some basic analysis, why the vitriolic response?

Forums are supposed to be about opinions. While there is no need to be hurtful or disrespectful, an honest discussion about these incidents is what one should expect in a forum and attempts to shout down those who offer opinions on that subject says more about the insecurity of the protestors than the competency of those offering the opinions.

Ok, so here's my opinion and bias: As a former professional Heli-ski guide with both AIARE and AAI Level 2 certifications, I believe that you shouldn't be out there if you aren't willing to take ten minutes to dig a pit to see what's actually happening in the snow pack. You should have done some research before leaving home, but still have an open mind about what you will find, what you will ski/ride and whether to turn around and accept that it was just a good day for a hike. If you are an occasional backcountry skier/rider, you should take a Level 1 class. If your life is built around "crushing it" in the backcountry, you should take a Level 2 course. In both cases, you have to apply what you are taught - a certification without that is just a piece of paper. Taking those steps won't guarantee your safety - you can do everything right and still be at risk. Not taking steps to mitigate the risks is foolish.

You are welcome to disagree. That's what forums are for.

Peace.

[LeeLau]

jserra - I think most people would disagree with your emphasis on pits and snow science. If you want a discussion about that; start another thread and I think you'll get useful discussion.

[userA]

these things take some time to sort out rog
bf

[Tye 1on]

Every fact listed in my first paragraph is easily verifiable with ten minutes on-line research. Those facts support the limited inferences I offered. I am sorry you don't care for my opinion, but my point remains the same: even experts doing everything right are at risk. I didn't criticize, didn't blame and don't believe I gave you cause for incivility.

What torqued me was 'based on those facts i'd bet they dug a pit down low and were going to do another one...' That is pure speculation. If you have facts to base that on let me know. But projecting what you would have done onto these two is bullshit.

Yes, possible and I didn't know either of these gentlemen so I don't know what they would have done. With hindsight one could then opine that not digging a pit was a mistake - it might have yielded enough information to change or call off the mission. If so, that decision was tragic.


You are welcome to disagree. That's what forums are for.

Peace.

Well, that's what i did, disagree, but with 'incivility'. This place calls bullshit by it's proper name. And calls out good stuff equally as strongly.

I appreciate your experience and training and don't disagree that studying accidents and determining lessons learned has great value. But you are over-focused on pit study. In my personal opinion, the two biggest factors were the time of day they were ascending, which is still not fully known, and possibly the familiarity heuristic trap influencing their decision making.

jserra - I think most people would disagree with your emphasis on pits and snow science. If you want a discussion about that; start another thread and I think you'll get useful discussion.

Good call Lee, that thread has been started here.

[skifishbum]

Ok, so here's my opinion and bias: As a former professional Heli-ski guide with both AIARE and AAI Level 2 certifications, That's what forums are for.

wow 17 posts before the exguide with overpriced cert dick wave
i'm impressed
now another thread rediscussing this fine threadhttp://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...od-for-nothing complete some Roj reminicin bout him and the 1/4 lappin bobble avvy xpert not diggin pits because they meadow skip the bc blue squares.
here i was thinkin this place had a higher purpose but exguide jong has enlightened me to what the forums are for
mmacqbin
so hot right now