Police say avalanche beacon didn't work in fatal slide

[grrrr]

<From the Seattle PI>

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

NELSON, British Columbia -- An emergency beacon failed to work after a man was caught in an avalanche and died, and Royal Canadian Mounted Police want to know why.

The beacon was found strapped to the torso of Michael Duffy, 36, of San Francisco, who died Jan. 30 when he and 14 other skiers and snowboarders were hit by a slide in the Valhalla Mountains west of this southcentral British Columbia town.

Searchers, hampered by the lack of a locator signal, found Duffy's body Thursday in about four feet of debris, police Constable Heather Macdonald said.

A female companion was buried about as deep but was located quickly because her beacon worked, and she was dug out by a guide a few minutes after the accident.

Police said an autopsy would be conducted to determine whether Duffy suffocated or died of injuries from the slide.

Duffy's device was turned on, had a properly charged battery and had been checked by guides, "but it looks like there was some kind of equipment failure because it was not transmitting," she said. "We'll be looking into the reasons why."

The beacon will be sent to an electronics laboratory for testing, police said.

Macdonald said two guides and a party of 13 skiers and boarders had just finished their first run of the day when the slide began high above them in an area known as Russell Bowl. The slide traveled about a mile and measured 3.5 out of 5 on the avalanche scale.

Duffy's body was found about 265 feet from where he is believed to have been caught by the slide.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

wow...tragic.

I wonder what beacon it was and what the heck could have gone wrong with it.

[Snow Dog]

From a previous thread on beacons it was mentioned that there's no specific spec for beacons. They just meet general consumer electronics guidelines for temperature and vibration. I haven't seen any life cycle or test to destruction tests either. Maybe somebody should.

[H-man]

Originally posted by Tyrone Shoelaces
wow...tragic.

I wonder what beacon it was and what the heck could have gone wrong with it.

Yah, 10-4. Hopefully we get some good info on this when the analysis is done

[Ireallyliketoski2]

RIP. 14 skiers in an avalanche zone (or runout zone) with guides, what? So tragic, it will be interesting to read more of this as it develops. This reiterates that of utmost importance is to not to get caught in a slide in the first place. If you do, survival has a lot more to do with luck than skill and equipment.

[Mulletizer]

Originally posted by Ireallyliketoski
This reiterates that of utmost importance is to not to get caught in a slide in the first place. If you do, survival has a lot more to do with luck than skill and equipment.

Although continuing to practice with your beacon might not be such a bad idea...

[InspectorGadget]

Well prepared and to no avail, most unfortunate.

That certainly pokes some holes in my beacon confidence level.

[Ireallyliketoski2]

Originally posted by InspectorGadget
Well prepared and to no avail, most unfortunate.

That certainly pokes some holes in my beacon confidence level.

I don't think that anyone's beacon confidence should be too high to begin with, I've heard stats from snow courses saying that for successful rescues only about 20% of those are from beacon rescues and the other 80% are from visual clues. In other words if you are completely buried (no visual clues) you only have about a 20% chance of surviving the slide. Granted you can spin statistics a thousand different ways but I think that this reiterates that luck plays the biggest role in your survival chances if you are caught.

But I agree practice is the best thing that you can do to up those chances. So keep practicing!

[grrrr]

I have always assumed the beacon works. I think it's time to start testing the tranmission in addition to testing ability to locate. It would be a quick check, could be done a couple times each season.

[Ireallyliketoski2]

Originally posted by grrrr
I have always assumed the beacon works. I think it's time to start testing the tranmission in addition to testing ability to locate. It would be a quick check, could be done a couple times each season.

I was always taught prior to each trip to test both transmission range and locating ability for all beacons in the group. Can be done at the trailhead, you search me, I search you. This helps determine the beacon's range which can vary from day to day based on a variety of factors, the beacon's range can then help to determine the size of the search path that you need to do in case of a burial.

[Beaver]

Originally posted by grrrr
I have always assumed the beacon works. I think it's time to start testing the tranmission in addition to testing ability to locate. It would be a quick check, could be done a couple times each season.

Or you could do it every day on the skin track. That way you could also check that everyone remembered to turn thiers on & has good batteries. I used to do that all the time but in recent years have not done it regularly.

[AK G-Dog]

Originally posted by Snow Dog
destruction tests

I saw some tests somewhere a couple years ago. I am not sure where, it may have been over at the old place?

[Spamhelmet]

As they (avalanche freakos) talked on the telemark and couloir forums , the beacons have tendecy to "loose" their frecuency as the time passes. Didnt find the link now, but remember vaguely that some *inser brand name* transceivers lost their frequency +/- 50 to 100hrz in few years. At least Pieps (or some other brand...) has a service where they re-calibrate the crystall after few years use. Absolutely no idea if that kind of thing has happened in this case...
Also, couple of years ago, friend of a friend of a friend had a high speed crash in deep snow. No injuries or anything. After couple of days, he found out that his transciever RECIEVED signals, but didnt transmit (at leas no one could read his transciever)..
...end of my rant...

..pfft..


Edit: BCA (if i remember right..too much wine..yes,im a wine lover too..) test their beacons dropping to concrete from 3m. And soaks them in liquids too.

And as someone mentioned couple of posts below, the particular beacon that seized to function after the avalanche was a ortovox m-1, its clip in system that activates the beacon got broken. correct if im wrong..

[Shredhead]

Would you expect any electronic device to work after bashing it against a rock. With a slide this big the forces placed on the his beacon could have been huge.

Beacons should be checked frequently. I had problems with my Tracker recently. I have to say BCA was great at standing behind there product.

http://www.epicski.com/cgi-bin/ultim...c;f=8;t=000270

[Greydon Clark]

With the Castle Peak accident--I think--the batteries went dead before the victim could be located (it took days). But a year or two ago a guy died in Jackson when his beacon was damaged in the slide that buried him. I have seen a beacon rendered inoperable after being dropped on the floor of a hut.

Shredhead- I agree that the forces experienced in this slide were huge--wasn't it a class 3? However, IMO, the next step for beacon manufactures is a more durable beacon. They should be like the black box on an airplane--you can hit them with a hammer, set them on fire and put out the flames with a mixture of Coca-Cola and vinegar and it will still transmit. (A degree of exaggeration has been employed for effect.)

Spamhead- I read the same thread on TTips, good info on why you should retire that Pieps you bought during the first Bush administration.

[bad_roo]

Originally posted by Ireallyliketoski
I've heard stats from snow courses saying that for successful rescues only about 20% of those are from beacon rescues and the other 80% are from visual clues. In other words if you are completely buried (no visual clues) you only have about a 20% chance of surviving the slide.

Your logic is flawed.

[Dr. Crash]

Originally posted by grrrr
I have always assumed the beacon works. I think it's time to start testing the tranmission in addition to testing ability to locate. It would be a quick check, could be done a couple times each season.

Uh. Isn't that what you're doing at the trailhead with your friends? A beacon check?

drC

[365wp]

Originally posted by Ireallyliketoski
I've heard stats from snow courses saying that for successful rescues only about 20% of those are from beacon rescues and the other 80% are from visual clues. In other words if you are completely buried (no visual clues) you only have about a 20% chance of surviving the slide.

I think it's lower than that. Around 25% of av fatalities are trauma related, so you start off with a chance of being in that 75% group of people who are buried but possibly rescued. Then you factor in the whole 20% completely buried (no clues).

Yikes.

[gincognito]

Originally posted by 365wp

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Ireallyliketoski
I've heard stats from snow courses saying that for successful rescues only about 20% of those are from beacon rescues and the other 80% are from visual clues. In other words if you are completely buried (no visual clues) you only have about a 20% chance of surviving the slide.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it's lower than that. Around 25% of av fatalities are trauma related, so you start off with a chance of being in that 75% group of people who are buried but possibly rescued. Then you factor in the whole 20% completely buried (no clues).

Yikes.

The (tiny, miniscule, negligable) statistician in me is cringing.

Sick and ashamed and happy (and he's not big enough to go into details),
d.

[iceman]

There's clearly some bad math in this thread.

What per cent of people who get buried in slides die?

[LCC]

A similar arguement took place last year when Steve Haas was killed poaching Hourglass at Jackson last year. I wrote a few letters to the editor of the Jackson Hole News and Guide. Of course, I was grossly misquoted.

Shock in electronics is a problem that is considered when making all consumer electronics. I've studied this extensively as my career dictates it. Avalanche Transceivers are built pretty rugged, but sometimes, freak things happen.

[Beaver]

A visiual clue is not necessarily a hand or foot sticking out of the snow. Visual clues include skis, poles, backpack, touque....., stuff hat was with the victim when the avalanche hit him. His gear will generaly travel at the same speed thereby giving a clue as to where to start looking.

[gincognito]

Originally posted by iceman


What per cent of people who get buried in slides die?

And the iceman pulls out the crucial question...

Sick and ashamed and happy (and thinking that, among this mathematical nitpicking, I should acknowledge the tragedy of the event ),
d.

[cj001f]

Originally posted by iceman
What per cent of people who get buried in slides die?

This is probably what your looking for:
http://www.bcaccess.com/pdf/CompanionRescue_Atkins.pdf
32% of amateur transceiver searches were "succesful" i.e retrieved someone who lived.
58% of professional (ski patrol, etc.) transceiver searches were "succesful" i.e retrieved someone who lived.

If your at all interested in avy safety, read the tech report section of BC Access's website.

[Ireallyliketoski2]

Originally posted by bad_roo
Your logic is flawed.

I don't doubt it, I was speaking from a very bad memory, I lack that.

Edit - what were we talking about?