Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 245
  1. #101
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    PRB
    Posts
    21,126
    I wonder how in depth the CAIC report will be, given that it's been pretty difficult (I am guessing) to get out into the field and examine the slide/area.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    I feel that this is a bit overstated. When everything is coming down, just stay off of and out from underneath avalanche terrain. Its not rocket science. Human factors may make the decision difficult, but just be disciplined. Think about the consequences of everything around you and just say no.
    When everything is sliding like it has been, places that many would have thought were not underneath avalanche terrain have turned out to be under such terrain, when the slides are at historic levels.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    441

    Jones Pass Fatality

    Quote Originally Posted by SterlingSpikeDancer View Post
    Help me understand as someone who skis sidecountry, and not true backcountry. It is a dangerous activity and I understand that. But help me understand the decision making that leads to this human caused death.
    Sidecountry is backcountry. Any area that is outside ski resort boundaries and therefore not patrolled, bombed, etc should be treated as backcountry. Just because you started on a lift and then hike out of bounds doesnít mean you are in less danger. I would argue it can be even more dangerous as you didnít pick up information as you toured up into a zone.

    Take some classes to gain knowledge and find some experienced mentors to show you the ropes.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,490

    Jones Pass Fatality

    Quote Originally Posted by Danno View Post
    When everything is sliding like it has been, places that many would have thought were not underneath avalanche terrain have turned out to be under such terrain, when the slides are at historic levels.
    Donít overthink it. Look at a topo. Does it have avalanche terrain above it? If you want to get more risky, use the alpha angle and run some conservative calculations.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,874
    Lindahl is right: if it's cold enough I can always stick to lower foothills that have nothing at all above shallow, almost totally flat slopes. Boring in some ways, but historic conditions generally provide interesting things to observe. It's possible to go out without going into avi terrain.

    ETA: Meant to note that I'm not in CO, just speaking in general.
    Last edited by jono; 03-12-2019 at 01:30 PM.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    Don’t overthink it. Look at a topo. Does it have avalanche terrain above it? If you want to get more risky, use the alpha angle and run some conservative calculations.
    Exactly - But while the process is simple, I will point out that the pool of safe, but good ski pots will be significantly reduced in conditions such as these. I was looking for treed slopes <30 deg that top out well below treeline. Approach cannot pass beneath even distant (defined by historic alpha angle) avy terrain. Usually, for considerable or even high danger, a bunch of spots with relative safety can be considered appropriate. I think of popular places like south side of trelease, butler gulch, Vic trees (mostly), etc. For the conditions last week, all of those spots were off the table for me.

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    8,245
    FWIW a few of the recent large, historical slides have run well beyond what their alpha angle calculations would say. The slide on Victoria/Peak one for instance. There have been multiple new avalanche paths created just last week, so traditional wisdom might cause you to think that you are not in avalanche terrain when you really are. I've also seen some pretty big slide in heavily treed areas.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,010
    Quote Originally Posted by shredgnar View Post
    FWIW a few of the recent large, historical slides have run well beyond what their alpha angle calculations would say. The slide on Victoria/Peak one for instance. There have been multiple new avalanche paths created just last week, so traditional wisdom might cause you to think that you are not in avalanche terrain when you really are. I've also seen some pretty big slide in heavily treed areas.
    What was the angle on the Victoria/Peak slide?

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by shredgnar View Post
    FWIW a few of the recent large, historical slides have run well beyond what their alpha angle calculations would say. The slide on Victoria/Peak one for instance. There have been multiple new avalanche paths created just last week, so traditional wisdom might cause you to think that you are not in avalanche terrain when you really are. I've also seen some pretty big slide in heavily treed areas.
    A friend said they measured 18, which was perfectly in line with 100 year extent for CO. I was a bit curious though because the path is a bit circuitous. Checked the path out yesterday morning it it sure is frightening.

    Edited - using my GPS track to roughly estimate the toe of the slide, I calc 21.8 deg alpha. Well above the 18 deg - 100 year standard. If I factor in the actual path length vs line of sight, I get 21 deg.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    I feel that this is a bit overstated. When everything is coming down, just stay off of and out from underneath avalanche terrain. Its not rocket science. Human factors may make the decision difficult, but just be disciplined. Think about the consequences of everything around you and just say no.
    I disagree, youíre reverting back to the ĎI can make good decisionsí mantra and using that four letter word ďjustĒ. Thatís my point - in conditions like that it isnít as simple as writing or telling yourself ďjustĒ do this or do that.

    But yeah if you just stay safe then youíll stay safe.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    Keystone is fucking lame. But, deadly.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    17,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    When everything is coming down, just stay off of and out from underneath avalanche terrain. Its not rocket science. Human factors may make the decision difficult, but just be disciplined. Think about the consequences of everything around you and just say no.
    Or one could ski an avalanche chute solo on a black day cuz... human factors: https://www.instagram.com/p/BuuinCFFoc5/
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

  11. #111
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,490

    Jones Pass Fatality

    Quote Originally Posted by shredgnar View Post
    FWIW a few of the recent large, historical slides have run well beyond what their alpha angle calculations would say. The slide on Victoria/Peak one for instance. There have been multiple new avalanche paths created just last week, so traditional wisdom might cause you to think that you are not in avalanche terrain when you really are. I've also seen some pretty big slide in heavily treed areas.
    Like I said... if you want to get more risky, use alpha angles. You can avoid it all together by not. And yes, the terrain that fits these parameter is very limited. But you canít really control that. Again, comes back to being disciplined.

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    5,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick View Post
    I disagree, youíre reverting back to the ĎI can make good decisionsí mantra and using that four letter word ďjustĒ. Thatís my point - in conditions like that it isnít as simple as writing or telling yourself ďjustĒ do this or do that.
    No. Donít ski on or below avalanche terrain. It IS just that simple if you want to stay safe.

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    PRB
    Posts
    21,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    Donít overthink it. Look at a topo. Does it have avalanche terrain above it? If you want to get more risky, use the alpha angle and run some conservative calculations.
    Quote Originally Posted by trogdortheburninator View Post
    Exactly - But while the process is simple, I will point out that the pool of safe, but good ski pots will be significantly reduced in conditions such as these. I was looking for treed slopes <30 deg that top out well below treeline. Approach cannot pass beneath even distant (defined by historic alpha angle) avy terrain. Usually, for considerable or even high danger, a bunch of spots with relative safety can be considered appropriate. I think of popular places like south side of trelease, butler gulch, Vic trees (mostly), etc. For the conditions last week, all of those spots were off the table for me.
    Quote Originally Posted by shredgnar View Post
    FWIW a few of the recent large, historical slides have run well beyond what their alpha angle calculations would say. The slide on Victoria/Peak one for instance. There have been multiple new avalanche paths created just last week, so traditional wisdom might cause you to think that you are not in avalanche terrain when you really are. I've also seen some pretty big slide in heavily treed areas.
    What these guys said is what I am getting at. Sure, if you're on a little hill, with nothing taller around for a mile in any direction, then there is "no avalanche terrain above". But in conditions like this, people could be on a thickly treed 20 degree slope with nothing obvious above them, and still be in more danger than they realize.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    PRB
    Posts
    21,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    No. Don’t ski on or below avalanche terrain. It IS just that simple if you want to stay safe.
    It is.

    What isn't always so simple is determining whether you are truly below avalanche terrain or not. Many people might think that is the case when it is not, when facing conditions that are highly unusual. My guess is the fatality that is the subject of this thread thought he was in safe terrain.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin

  15. #115
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Summit View Post
    Or one could ski an avalanche chute solo on a black day cuz... human factors: https://www.instagram.com/p/BuuinCFFoc5/
    I saw that. Irresponsible.

    Those most subject to human factors are apparently completely oblivious to the influence of said factors.

    ĎI willfully ignore the avalanche forecast since Iím above that and chose a bunch of random observations that miraculously give me the go ahead and then Iíll post to my thousands of followers about skiing an avalanche path during extreme danger ratingí


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    Keystone is fucking lame. But, deadly.

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    4,447
    Quote Originally Posted by Danno View Post
    But in conditions like this, people could be on a thickly treed 20 degree slope with nothing obvious above them, and still be in more danger than they realize.
    Sure, but this doesn't mean he's wrong. The fact that some bc skiers ski terrain they feel/judge to be safe while being ignorant of what is above them is orthogonal to the proposition that one can safely ski in the bc even on the highest of danger days.

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    No. Donít ski on or below avalanche terrain. It IS just that simple if you want to stay safe.
    Iíve been BC long enough to know to question my own judgment at times like that.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    Keystone is fucking lame. But, deadly.

  18. #118
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Summit View Post
    Or one could ski an avalanche chute solo on a black day cuz... human factors: https://www.instagram.com/p/BuuinCFFoc5/
    But dude Fritz said "I stand by my methods and as an ambassador to the sport put those methods to criticism publicly. I have skied in Europe and only used a guide one for a zone I didnít do my research on and hadnít planned to ski. I tagged a lot of peaks that trip."

    He is a pro dirt bagger. Knowledge knowledge son

  19. #119
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    317
    Here is a quick map of the new pk 1 (or peak 0.5) path. Also called the original Ironing Board.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	newpk1path.jpg 
Views:	102 
Size:	527.2 KB 
ID:	273709

  20. #120
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    17,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Danno View Post
    Sure, if you're on a little hill, with nothing taller around for a mile in any direction, then there is "no avalanche terrain above". But in conditions like this, people could be on a thickly treed 20 degree slope with nothing obvious above them, and still be in more danger than they realize.
    Yes and that is terrifying in a way. We spoke about it from a rescue standpoint, about how hard it would be to route find if responding to an avalanche in such conditions like the expanded Peak 1 runout, areas that are exposed to multiple start zones under historic conditions or require passage through thick timber that is theoretically exposed to historic avalanching, to reach potential victims in debris from a historic slide! Everyone talked about Peak 1 which slide from it's NE face, but there's multiple zones, and the Tenmile Peak/Peak 1 drainage partially slid historically riding hundreds of feet up a ridge wiping out old growth and clearing out a partially grown older path. Nobody mentions that but we could see it. We thought about it a lot after 1 and Royal slid with someone soloing J chute on 3/7 while the rescue on Jones was underway: https://www.instagram.com/p/BuuinCFFoc5/ and then J slid that night reshaping the trees in the runout so it is no longer a J.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick View Post
    I this case IMO the approach road that they use as well as this run are exposed to multiple slide paths from above. Typically it’s not a problem because the exposure is remote as this path infrequently slides and other exposures are south/SW facing and don’t often offer a threat.
    Indeed. Henderson control teams knocked down huge slides following. PA didn't think of that on the way in on 3/7 (or did they?). I wonder if anyone was shivering thinking about it on the way back out to meet the ambulance after what had happened?
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

  21. #121
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    PRB
    Posts
    21,126
    Quote Originally Posted by mall walker View Post
    Sure, but this doesn't mean he's wrong. The fact that some recreational bc skiers ski terrain they feel/judge to be safe while being ignorant of what is above them is orthogonal to the proposition that one can safely ski in the bc even on the highest of danger days.
    I didn't say he was wrong. In fact, in my subsequent post I explicitly said he's right. But let's be clear, the guide that died surely thought he was setting up somewhere safe too. It's a nice pithy statement that it's all about not being ignorant of what's above you. But the point is that it can be difficult to evaluate, more difficult than "experts" might be willing to admit.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin

  22. #122
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SF & the Ho
    Posts
    5,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Summit View Post
    Or one could ski an avalanche chute solo on a black day cuz... human factors: https://www.instagram.com/p/BuuinCFFoc5/
    Wow, that guy. He's like the anti vaxer of avy avoidance

  23. #123
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    17,627
    Quote Originally Posted by mcski View Post
    Wow, that guy. He's like the anti vaxer of avy avoidance
    He's a "sponsored pro skier" and an "ambassador of BC skiing" according to him... I really like your description, sums it up without profanity.
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

  24. #124
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,135
    In an avi class that I took a while ago, we watched a short video, shot mostly in CO, I think, multiple slides going big. Almost all the slides overtook the camera person, several were avi pros (if I remember correctly), and most or all died. Part of OAGís point in showing the film was about how easy it can be to underestimate the hazard when things are going BIG.

    Another example is people getting pulled off flat or nearly flat ridgelines relatively far away from the edge when the slope below rips due to the cohesion of the slab.

    In the Tahoe area, there are some areas that are typically judged as safe, but were created by a historic recurrence avi, like the open areas on trimmer peak. Same with some areas of the Sherwins zone in mammoth.

  25. #125
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    17,627
    Quote Originally Posted by trogdortheburninator View Post
    Here is a quick map of the new pk 1 (or peak 0.5) path. Also called the original Ironing Board.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	newpk1path.jpg 
Views:	102 
Size:	527.2 KB 
ID:	273709
    Thanks for that.

    There are two other Ironing Boards in the immediate area, one just N of Grizzly going W, the other farther down in Atlantic Bowl on LP near the natural pipe.
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •