 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Personally I'd be wary of cheap Amazon deals on such an item, and while the snowsafe one seems to be too good to be true, I had thought of them as a reputable supplier - why not phone them and ask why it is so cheap?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I have decent ali shovels from known brands that I carry with me on snow and lend to friends who visit and ski with me.
I have cheap ali shovels I bought from Costco which I leave in the boot of the truck for the possibility of digging it out, or clearing building steps etc.
I do not confuse the two things, and I have so far bent two of the cheap ones.
Decent ones don't have to be expensive, at least two of my Ortovox ones were sub €20 when reduced at Technique Extreme in Chx.
The pics in the links you post all look very like my bendy disposable Costco ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@Ozboy, I have one of the terrawest ones, its in the back of the car for digging out that and the kids have used it for building kickers, and its been fine for that, but for rock hard avi debris it would probably break, but would probably be better than the clear plastic ones you see about.
I have a new spare pieps c720, that you could have for £45 inc post if you would like it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Thanks all - I hear you about the cheap ones which confirmed my concerns.
@Zorrac, thanks for kind offer I’ll DM you once I’ve had a look around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I carry a decent BCA medium sized shovel with a welded top, my older one is now my car digging out shovel. For snow pits and avi digging I want the strongest I can get.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@PowderAdict, +1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
@skitow, If I ever ski off piste with someone carrying a plastic shovel I would do the same 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
And the same for people with 2-2.5m probes just as useless
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
And the same for people with 2-2.5m probes just as useless
|
Depends what you are using the probe for. Ideally the probe is for making sure you don't dig just to the side of someone after locating them with a transceiver. It you have to dig more than 2m the chances of getting to them in time are very low anyway. If you are doing a probe search, then it turns out probing to a shallower depth will recover more people alive. Simply put you cover more ground quickly and have a better chance of digging them out alive. There are published papers on the subject. If you are looking for a body then by all means use a 3m or longer probe, just don't expect to dig anyone out alive probing to that depth.
Meanwhile I have always carried a shorter probe and a honking bing titanium/magnesium alloy shovel (even when plastic was all the rage) safe in the knowledge that should I have call to use it in anger that my combination has the best chance of getting someone out alive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
@jabuzzard, as I've mentioned on here a fair few times before and apologies to others for the scratched record scenario....
I had my 2.4 m thrown away by one of the instructors on Euro Avalanche Course (which is a pretty intense week-long course) as being feckin useless, just as a plastic shovel.
The reasons as demonstrated to me; but let's make it easier for you and others.
So stand up in the comfort of your room with your mini probe, at best depending on your height take your probe, and stand upright, at best you'll be holding on to the top 10% of it, which will be just above your head, so the whole probe is on the surface without even probing, yes / no?
Even if you probe down a metre how much of the probe is then above the surface relative to your body height?
So as you have to work fast, you'd be in almost a squat position as you probe down and then have to stand up to retrieve/pull up the probe to start probing again is pretty damn useless!
A good probing action is the use of both hands to push down and then pull up in a repetitive motion, and quickly, compound that with fresh snow of at least 30-50cms and you've lost even more of the potential probe length!
Exhibit A is a good example of 3m+ probes and imagine if they were around head height?
And as a PS how many of you have whipped out their probes, flicked them out to test getting them together, just in case some retailer clip is not holding the bag etc together with some plastic clip ?
I've seen people taking 2mins (in a test environment) to do what should be only ten seconds
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Perhaps, but I don't expect to ever to a probe search. It would mean that you where not wearing a transceiver and well sucks to be you in that casat e. As I said my probe is for making sure I don't miss the person in a dig not finding dead bodies.
Anyway the optimum probe depth for a probe search is apparently 1.5m to maximise the number of people recovered alive, so a 3m probe is a waste of time unless you want to dig out dead bodies. I don't ever expect to be involved in a probe search for bodies so your instructors where uniformed.
http://www.alpine-rescue.org/ikar-cisa/documents/2010/ikar20101202000676.pdf
I will admit it is somewhat counter intuitive but I go with the science rather than what is effectively a Spanish practice that is likely killing people. To be fair I don't expect the average or even 99% of avalanche rescuers to have a firm grasp of statistical methods like this. But hey you can have knighthood and be a professor like the git Roy Meadow and have limited functional understanding of statistics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@jabuzzard, I think you are confusing depth of probing with probe length. To probe rapidly to 1.5m you need a probe much longer than 1.5m. If you consider a ski pole to be an appropriate comfortable height at 1.2-1.3m, then your probe needs to be 2.7m to probe to 1.5m depth.
Back onto shovels, I like the fact that this topic is getting some air time. There sometimes seems to be a lot of focus on the optimal transceiver vs the optimal shovel, yet shovelling consumes a lot more time. Has anyone seen any comparative reviews of the ability of different shovels to clear a given volume of snow?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
I am relatively new to this so go gentle!
Sorry to go back to probe length but I don't see how a longer probe is a disadvantage. If you are probing half meter of snow wether you have a 2m or 3m probe it's the same work to be done just more probe above snow? Or am I missing something simple?
On the plus side of this thread, I am thinking of one of those cheep shovels for the boot..... just incase the Scottish ski season starts this year!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
@WASHOUT, the extra probe wobbling about above your head probably makes it harder to aim the probe. I'd guess this is only going to make a noticeable difference in a probe line (i.e. in the scenario investigated in the paper that @jabuzzard links to). If you are probing to confirm a location after transceiver search then it's much less likely to be relevant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
There is another good article here
https://mountainwagon.com/the-blog/probing-probes-a-purchase-prompted-parley
Very long probes are slower to use, so you probe less, and if you are buried more than about 1.5 meters down the chance of survival is very reduced, if you work it out by timing, best survival is about 15 to 20 mins buried no more, so 2 meters deep buried, with avalanche snow about 1/2 ton per cubic metre, means about 4 cubic meters to be dug out, (2 x2 hole) 10 minutes to find them if your lucky, you have 10 minutes to dig out 2 tons of snow............ So you need a good strong shovel that is easy to use and shifts alot of snow quickly and cycle the diggers
Last edited by Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. on Sat 26-01-19 11:05; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
I can see a sensible debate is pointless 
|
Did you read the paper with the statistical analysis of probe depth and it's relationship to the likely hood of recovering a person alive? I guess the answer is no, and the reality is that every instructor I have come across has not either. So they are working on old and wrong analysis of the right probe depth to use. Consequently they are uniformed as to the right probe depth to use.
Regardless I won't ever be in the business of a probe based search because I don't ski off piste with groups that don't wear transceivers. Like I said if I where to come across a group that didn't wear transceivers that has been avalanched, then sucks to be them. However that would not be my problem and I will have no guilt if any of the die because my probe is not long enough.
So for the reasons I have given carrying an extra long probe is for me literally a waste of my energy. Instead I choose to carry a smaller probe and put the balance saved in weight to a larger better shovel that will make a difference in digging a victim out alive. I have weighed up the cost and risks and have concluded for me it is better to carry a shorter probe and a bigger shovel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just had a quick look on the BCA website the smallest on there is 2.4m( don't seem to make a 2m anymore for some reason??) The weight difference from 2.4 to 3.3m (both aluminum) is 80g & 2.4 to 3m in carbon is 40g..... prob about the same difference between a good dump and a bad dump in the morning.
I go back to my original question what's the benefit of a small probe?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@jabuzzard, how about a near piste avalanche that you witness whilst skiing on-piste? You have your avi kit with you but initial search suggests the victim is not wearing a transceiver. You get out your probe only to find it is not long enough to use efficiently. There are some photos on here somewhere of an organised search for avalanche victims in Tignes a few years ago. Avalanche occured close to the piste (and may even have been on a closed piste). There are an awful lot of probes in use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@WASHOUT, A smaller probe is faster, and time is critical, have a read of the lower part of this article (that i posted above) that also links to the other one
https://mountainwagon.com/the-blog/probing-probes-a-purchase-prompted-parley
Having tried probing with a 3.2metre probe in a practice sesson I went back to my 2.4 meter one, as I am not that tall, and the long probe was just a bit more awkward to use, and for me slower, the old spare 1.8 metre bca one I keep in a shovel handle was slightly useless, it only just touched the buried back pack
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks averyone for your shovel input - I have now bought a more appropriate shovel. When with the BCA B1 Ext which seems like a good balance between performance / size / weight / price. My older plastic one is now relegated to car duties as plannned.
Weighing in on the probe debate... it seems to me having a longer one gives you the option to go shallow or deep!
Question: I have a 3m a Black Diamon probe but the closed end of the bag is ruined from being constantly probed by the point. Any ideas where I can get a replacement bag or what is a durable substitute?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
@zorrac I have read the report it makes no comment that you are quicker with a long or short probe, but what does make a difference is how deep you probe which is common sense ie it's going to take me longer to push and pull the probe to 2m than 1.5m
You do raise a good point that you where more comfortable using a shorter probe which ties back to the report of having good technique.
Think I will stick with my recent purchase (3m) learn properly how to use it (most important), hope I never need to use it and not have the attitude if I come across somebody else in trouble it sucks to be them 
And not worry about some lady's front bottom of a instructor throwing it away!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
@WASHOUT, It does in a roundabout way here
When looking at the 1 hole per step technique, rescuers averaged 7.42 holes/person/minute when doing a “full depth” probe to 2.1m. When the probe depth was shortened to 1.5m, that rate increased to 8.03 holes/person/minute – an 8% increase in speed.
The 3 holes per step technique to a depth of 1.5m resulted in a probe rate of 13.21 holes/person/minute – an increase in speed of 65%.
with a longer probe you will tend to push it down as far as you can, (especialy as you will be a bit stressed) so will tend to do a full depth probe all the time, but with a shorter probe you will tend to probe shorter, so faster. what @jabuzzard, is going on about is survival under a certain depth is much less likely, so longer probes are better a finding bodies by the time you can dig them out, which is all a bit grim to think about.
With some of the people I have met skiing of piste, just having a probe at all can be a issue......................They have a beacon, and maybe shovel, but the probe seems to get missed.
The most important bit is practice, not matter how long the probe is............ as you say
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Still not convinced, but I nèed to get out and practise/play with all safety gear!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
On the fifth and final day of the Euro Avalanche Course after classroom exams in the morning then on the hill evaluation, snow pit, individual transceiver use etc - then you're split into two groups.
As a group we then ski down one of the main La Grave routes, to then come across a staged incident, a scenario where a number of people have been caught, skis and poles sticking out of the snow and a deranged person running around that we then try to get some sense out of (number of people buried etc).
A leader amongst us is appointed (we had a US Army Captain), and then we get to work to find the victims, all the time being watched by the examiners, the pressure was intense, not only to complete the search but you do not want to be the one that takes the longest and or fail!
After all the victims are found (backpack with transceivers) it's our turn to play the victims.
Back up the lift and then we select our terrain and get busy preparing the scene, covering foot prints up etc and burying the packs
Once the group had come down and finished the search, so we all thought, they only had 5 packs, one was missing, transpired that one of our group (very embarrassed) had buried his pack but had not put his transceiver on, so we all lined up and commenced a search as you would for someone without a transceiver, all quite ironic, and the pack was found quite quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
how about a near piste avalanche that you witness whilst skiing on-piste? You have your avi kit with you but initial search suggests the victim is not wearing a transceiver.
|
They are off-piste without a transceiver, which in Italy at least is now rightly illegal. IMHO it should be illegal everywhere. It's not my job to carry equipment around so that some random other person can not bother to do so. I carry a mixture of equipment specially chosen to maximise the chances of me being able to recover alive someone avalanched who is wearing a transceiver. As such I do not need and thus won't be carrying a 3m probe. I would of course render assistance in any avalanche scenario but if you are off-piste or on a closed piste without a transceiver I am not going to be your best bet to getting yourself dug out alive. I am very happy with the choices I have made.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Zorrac wrote: |
with a longer probe you will tend to push it down as far as you can, (especialy as you will be a bit stressed) so will tend to do a full depth probe all the time, but with a shorter probe you will tend to probe shorter, so faster. what @jabuzzard, is going on about is survival under a certain depth is much less likely, so longer probes are better a finding bodies by the time you can dig them out, which is all a bit grim to think about.
|
It's not just survival under a certain depth is much less likely, but that by limiting your probing depth you are able to cover a larger area faster, and are therefore also likely to find any buried body quicker and therefore have more chance of digging them out alive. As we are all every second count when you are looking to did someone out after an avalanche.
There is a balance between probing to a greater depth which maximizes the number of bodies found but increases the time to find them which makes them less likely to survive and besides being buried deeper reduces your chances anyway, and probing to a shallower depth, missing bodies on some searches but finding more bodies in time for a successful recovery by being able to cover a greater area in a shorter period of time.
It might all be a bit grim to think about but by thinking about it and doing the right statistical analysis more people could be recovered alive. Consequently any instructor telling you to do full depth probes in anything other than a body recovery scenario is uniformed. Unfortunately there are a lot of uniformed instructors.
I would further note that an instructor who may well be called out for a body recovery search would need different equipment to myself as I am unlikely to ever be involved in even a probe search let alone a body recovery probe search.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
