 Poster: A snowHead
|
| gortonator wrote: |
| achilles, so Harikari in Mayrhofen is 38 degrees peak, I assume ... groomed |
I'd forgotten Harikiri - discussed in another thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I will try to explain the steepness this way.
If a person looking at a 45 degree slope at a distance from the edge exactly equal his/her eye level from the ground then he/she would see the whole slope as bottomless and is just a straight line. I am assuming the slope is like a plane of smooth mirror. The person stands from the edge a horizontal distance equal to the vertical dimension from the ground to his/her eye so that is also 45 degree.
Most of the time when we ski we stand nearer to the edge and could see the bottom of the slope and so the slope should be a lot less than 45 degree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Max13biker wrote: |
If the Grand Couloir at Courcheval is quoted as 30 degrees, surely that means to the skier going downhill, he is skiing a slope of 30 deg from vertical.  |
I think I'm missing a logical step here. If a slope is 30 degrees from horizontal does it matter if you're skiing down it or driving up it? It's still 30 degrees from horizontal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
rob@rar, you're not missing anything. It is possible that the GC is 30 deg from the vertical, but usually slopes are measured from horizontal, as horizontal is 'normal'. Presumably the difficulty with the GC and couloirs in general is that it is narrow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| richmond wrote: |
| It is possible that the GC is 30 deg from the vertical, |
No, definitely not 30 degree from vertical. It's steep for a piste, but it isn't 60 degrees. I think at 60 degrees not much snow sticks to the slope.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Max13biker, all slopes are quoted in relation to the horizontal (or was that a joke I missed?).
People keep using the words "in bounds" in relation to Europe as well as the USA but it has no meaning here. The easily accessible slopes are at least as steep here as in the USA but the steepest are not classed or marked as trails here (though most have names - not marked on the piste map).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I remember on a school geography trip in the Peak district we were taken to a very steep slope and asked to estimate its gradient. We were all estimating around 60 degrees, but when the clinometer was bought out it was demonstrated as being far, far less (38 degrees from memory). Funny how the human mind works!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob@rar,
| Quote: |
I think at 60 degrees not much snow sticks to the slope.
|
In Europe that's basically true if you ignore non-standard situations e.g. moguls and cornices. You will really struggle to find anything over 55 degrees that will hold enough snow to be skiable and over 50 is pretty rare. However, at different latitudes snow may stick to much steeper slopes e.g. in the Peruvian Andes you can find 70 degree powder slopes, pretty remote destination though: wonder if anyone has ever considered it as a ski destination.
Slopes always feel steeper when stood on them as you look down from your height, it's the opposite as to why photos taken of skiers above you always make the slope look more flat than it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Swirly wrote: |
| in the Peruvian Andes you can find 70 degree powder slopes |
But would you be up for riding it...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Swirly wrote: |
rob@rar,
| Quote: |
I think at 60 degrees not much snow sticks to the slope.
|
in the Peruvian Andes you can find 70 degree powder slopes |
Yes, but they're in the southern hemisphere so gravity works in the opposite direction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Quote: |
In Europe that's basically true if you ignore non-standard situations e.g. moguls and cornices. You will really struggle to find anything over 55 degrees that will hold enough snow to be skiable and over 50 is pretty rare.
|
Spot on. If someone tells you they have skied >50 degrees in the Alps then they need to have skied the steepest thing in the area with snow on it. You can probably add snow on glacier snouts in the non-std situations.
J
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
I think I'm missing a logical step here. If a slope is 30 degrees from horizontal does it matter if you're skiing down it or driving up it? It's still 30 degrees from horizontal.
|
If you consider a slope in cross section as a right angled triangle.
If at the base looking up, the angle is 30 degree, then from the top looking down, the angle between vertically down and the slope is 60 degrees.
The three angles in a triangle add up to 180 degrees. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Max13biker wrote: |
| Quote: |
I think I'm missing a logical step here. If a slope is 30 degrees from horizontal does it matter if you're skiing down it or driving up it? It's still 30 degrees from horizontal.
|
If you consider a slope in cross section as a right angled triangle.
If at the base looking up, the angle is 30 degree, then from the top looking down, the angle between vertically down and the slope is 60 degrees.
The three angles in a triangle add up to 180 degrees. |
I understand trigonometry, thanks. By convention terrain is measured from the horizontal, so a 30 degree slope is 30 degrees regardless of whether you're heading up hill or down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| skiking4 wrote: |
tomstickland, I have stats from Google Earth posted on this page:
http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=50385&start=40
It's the last post.
richmond, Diressitima (run 3 at Kitzbuhel is not a steep run at all. It'd be considered an easy/average black in the states. And it's probably only 35 degrees for like 3 or 4 turns before mostly being 25-30 degrees. Great run though when you got a meter of freshies on it and they didn't groom it.  |
Much truth in that, I don't regard it as particularly diificult and I'm not a great skier. The steepest bit, I suspect, is just after you can enter it from the little path below the Jufenalm lift. You ski out onto it without being able to see what it's like; the first time I did so, it was a definite 'Whooooaaa, I wasn't expecting this.', but because it's 15 or 20 yards wide, it's fine. Whether it would be regarded as an easy/average black 'in the states' will depend on where you are in the states, of course; I have skied gentler, easier 'blacks' than that in the states and much more difficult ones. In other than v. bumpy (rare) or icy conditions, it would be red in some Euro resorts. It's a good example of why steepness on its own is of no more than passing interest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
I think many people on this thread are getting confused with % and not degrees.
Someone said something about 60-75degree slopes...utter rubbish. Snow will hardly grip to a slope that steep. At 55-60 degrees you can touch the slope with your elbow when you are skiing. Even the steepest routes in Chamonix are not much over that. Anything in the 50-55 degree angle is very serious indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Max13biker wrote: |
If you consider a slope in cross section as a right angled triangle.
If at the base looking up, the angle is 30 degree, then from the top looking down, the angle between vertically down and the slope is 60 degrees.
The three angles in a triangle add up to 180 degrees. |
True, but not relevant. Your're still skiing down a 30deg slope, whether you look up, down or across it. Your acceleration due to gravity will be g.sin30.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Swirly wrote: |
rob@rar,
Slopes always feel steeper when stood on them as you look down from your height, it's the opposite as to why photos taken of skiers above you always make the slope look more flat than it is. |
Actually photos tend to make things look flat when taken looking up or down. The reason is that the camera is tilted to take the shot but the photo is looked at assuming it is taken horizontally. This is made worse in photos looking up, since there is a skyline which could be taken for an ordinary horizon. In real life the slope looks least steep when you look horizontally across it, and this at least is faithfully reproduced in a photo.
A photo taken horizontally straight on to the slope (from far away, usually) often tends to look even steeper than it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| snowball wrote: |
Actually photos tend to make things look flat when taken looking up or down. The reason is that the camera is tilted to take the shot but the photo is looked at assuming it is taken horizontally. This is made worse in photos looking up, since there is a skyline which could be taken for an ordinary horizon. In real life the slope looks least steep when you look horizontally across it, and this at least is faithfully reproduced in a photo.
A photo taken horizontally straight on to the slope (from far away, usually) often tends to look even steeper than it is. |
All spot on. With no clinometer I've found the easiest way to estimate the angle of a slope is to look horizontally across it and assess the angle against trees which tend to grow vertically. But it's still very much an estimate!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Hope we're not getting to the stage where we are bringing plumb lines and protractors with us skiing !
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| kendub wrote: |
| Hope we're not getting to the stage where we are bringing plumb lines and protractors with us skiing ! |
Some people ski with a clinometer - useful to have a good idea of slope angle when skiing off piste in terms of avalanche risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure there's various bits of software for the iPhone and iPod Touch that'll measure angle. If I were heading out again this season I'd probably download one so as to have it with me should I need.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mfj197, there are (I use Tiltmeter Pro on my iPhone, although not used it for measuring ski slopes) but it's very easy to get a wildly inaccurate reading unless you take some sort of average reading for the slope rather than the particular lump or bump you happen to be standing on. As you said, better to be away from the slope and sight along or across to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
offpisteskiing taught me a useful trick.
All the internal angles in an equilateral triangle are 60 degrees. Most of us ski with two poles of equal length. Lay one of them in the snow and leave a mark. Plant a pole at either end of the mark and put the handles together. Bingo - instant equilateral triangle. If the downhill pole is vertical then you're on a 30 degree slope; pointing back up the hill - it's less than 30; down the hill - it's more than 30. And if the uphill pole is horizontal - I'll be impressed!
Alternatively, ski with a Recta compass. These have a built-in clinometer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| altis wrote: |
| Alternatively, ski with a Recta compass. |
At least you'll know which way your arzehole's pointing.
Like the thing with the poles, BTW.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Cheeky!
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
altis,
Like the thing with the poles too!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hold one pole vertically with the point on the snow and hold the other pole horizontally with point toward the slope with both handles touching. If the horizontal pole cant reach the snow the slope is less than 45 degrees. If the horizontal pole just reaches the slope it is 45 degrees. If the horizontal pole is pushing into the snow the slope is more than 45 degrees so pucker up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Sarge McSarge,
You can't beat altis on this one as it is a lot easier to form a equilateral triangle first as described by altis and then judge the angle later. Your suggestion is more trooublesome in a way that at a stand-up position of a steep slope it is quite challenging to judge a vertical or horizontal line when you have to hold both poles in steady positions. Both your horizontal or vertical poles are liable to error before you read the angle accurately.
altis suggestion is neater because the equilateral trinagle has already been fixed and error free. You only need one hand or a couple of fingers to stabilize the two handles and will be in a much better position to check the angle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Hey guys, don't give me the credit. The idea belongs to offpisteskiing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
