 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| jbob wrote: |
| https://www.facewest.co.uk/Facewest-Transceiver-Review.html?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletterW21bdguidecomp |
Summary : all x3 antenna digital beacons are pretty good these days.
In attempt to differentiate technology manufacturers now add multi burial features. However these will never be perfect (... unless the standard is adapted in future for each beacon to transmit unique identifying signal). Rather than worry about multi-burial features your time might be better spent practising safe travel and learning basics like how to correlate avy bulletin & weather forecast?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
My understanding is the biggest issue now with transceivers is practicing so you know how to use it when you are freezing cold, tired after most of a hard day and shaking from adreneline having just watched half your group get hit by avalanche...
I have seen strong arguments that several of the differentiating feature @Haggis_Trap mentions shouldn't actually be bought by novices, because they add complexity that you almost certainly aren't well enough trained/practiced to use. So KISS with a basic x3 digital antenna beacon and spend the difference getting training learning the basics because the best transceiver in the world doesn't help if you don't know how to use it fairly automatically (practice searches, what avalanche signs to look for, reading avy and weather forecast, carrying other emergency gear (thermal blanket/emergency shelter, basic first aid kit), hiring experts for more interesting days) and it is far better to be looking at the route you wanted to take but decided was too risky with a minimal transceiver + shovel + probe kit when an avalanche happens than half way down it in the path with the best transceiver and avy bag available...
This doesn't mean the features don't have a good place; Its just that place is often with people who can spend far longer than most holiday skiers in the mountains and so do extended practice sessions to know how best to use them...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
The biggest issue for me is to ensure that I know how to take the battery out of any and every transceiver.
Because that's what I'll be doing if I don't know how to power it down[1].
That's a whine about non-intuitive design and boy scout safety not about features.
Features? I once asked Alan Sugar why his electronics user manuals were so bad. He explained that
"features" were used by consumers to compare products at purchase time, but they never used any of them,
so the manual wasn't important. More modern designers may even say that if you need a manual, it's not right.
In the last couple of seasons heli operators have started training never-ever novices on multiple burials.
In training, people search quicker, more effectively, and in more complex scenarios now the
technology is better. So that's a feature which has arrived, matured, and is standard and usable.
Other features.. I don't think they endanger anyone, but most people will never use them.
--
[1] If you dig a Revo 5 equipped body out of a snowbank, then turning it off seems obvious - you press one thing, and
slide the other to the "off" position. Except that doesn't work: you need to then also press the
single button on the machine, then it's happy. It works well, but they're all different in that respect, which is a shame.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
FWIW, My gripe with multi-burial features :
1) Primarily they are differentiating features used to sell / market beacons.
Though in what real world scenario do you actually use them ?
... basically only multiple victims AND multiple searchers.
Even then there are moral issues with deciding who to dig up first...
Should whole team get first victims airway clear ? Or split up ?
2) The mask features will never work 100% reliably with existing technology / standards.
Each beacon transmits the same 457KHz signal. The mask feature works by simply ignoring a time-slot.
However the phase of each transmitting beacon drifts with time (relative to other searching beacons).
Therefore beacons can un-mask themselves over a period of ~5 minutes.
The only way to fix this reliably would be change to the standards that requires each beacon to transmit unique identifier.
3) Far better to focus training on other "basics"
How to dig efficiently. Safe travel, so only person ever exposed to risk <etc>
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@philwig, I totally agree with this. Extra features don't hurt. If it's too much, you just don't use them. Ok I'm probably out in backcountry more then most of people here, and I do more trainings in single year then most people do in their life, but personally I don't think Barryvox S for example is too complicated even for perfect novice. You don't need to use or even turn on all the features. Sure there's question if it's worth paying much more for Barryvox S if you won't use any of additional features. But if those 100eur or so difference is not an issue, at least those features are there, if you ever decide to use them. But for basic stuff, in my opinion it's just as simple to use as any other device, and if you ask me, it's actually more intuitive as most of older devices.
But I also agree that reading manual first, and then practicing in as realistic situations as possible is way more important then best ever device you can buy without any training. Only real situation I had, and which ended tragically, could easily have different outcome if people skiing with victim would at least read first 3 pages of transceiver manual. If they would do that, and go with proper procedures, I'm pretty sure that guy would be still alive today, especially considering how fast I had him out once I came to spot, but unfortunately I was some 45min too late on that spot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Haggis_Trap wrote: |
3) Far better to focus training on other "basics"
How to dig efficiently. Safe travel, so only person ever exposed to risk <etc> |
This. I reckon the order of time invested by people is as follows (from most to least):
1) Talking about transceivers on the internet
2) Researching which transceiver to buy
3) Practicing with their transceiver
4) Learning to dig
5) Practicing digging
Yet the time spent in an actual recovery is directly opposed to that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Haggis_Trap, sadly safe travel/ snow risk assessment takes a lot of experience and appears to be regularly substituted for a transceiver and airbag - so I would add one item to the list from @snowdave
6) Learning the basics of avalanche safety (terrain direction, wind deposits, snow layers and depth, digging snow pits etc) to minimise needing to use a transceiver in the first place.
Someone working in ski rental told me that quite a few people ask to rent avalanche airbag backpacks ("because they look cool") but did not want the actual airbag mechanism or transceiver and poles - which I find a bit scary too!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Bought my other half a zoom+ for occasional use. I tend to use it most of the time now, on the basis that I’m usually with only one other person, don’t really need the additional features, it’s really simple to use and comfortable in a chest pocket.
Training with it, I haven’t noticed any practical difference in range compared to other models. Great price too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Features? I once asked Alan Sugar why his electronics user manuals were so bad. He explained that
"features" were used by consumers to compare products at purchase time, but they never used any of them,
so the manual wasn't important. More modern designers may even say that if you need a manual, it's not right.
|
Reminds me of working as a software developer.
A senior manager telling us to move big customer over to new online service we need to implement feature X (which is evil to do). The customer won't accept that we have metrics showing the feature has been used on their account less than 20 times in the last few years (and our test system triggers it more times a day than all users globally per year)... 20 uses equates to a practical demonstration of the feature by sales staff to the customer.
Then they complain we don't have features of {insert sexy new startup} while not grasping this is mainly because unlike said startup we have a whole pile of unused features that have to be kept working with all possible interactions because they have been sold to customers who won't let them be dropped...
| oui4ski wrote: |
@Haggis_Trap, sadly safe travel/ snow risk assessment takes a lot of experience and appears to be regularly substituted for a transceiver and airbag - so I would add one item to the list from @snowdave
6) Learning the basics of avalanche safety (terrain direction, wind deposits, snow layers and depth, digging snow pits etc) to minimise needing to use a transceiver in the first place.
Someone working in ski rental told me that quite a few people ask to rent avalanche airbag backpacks ("because they look cool") but did not want the actual airbag mechanism or transceiver and poles - which I find a bit scary too! |
I have seen several videos/news articles/etc of people praising airbags for saving their lives and how everyone should use them. Invariably from skiers/snowboarders who went into terrain where :
1. The avalanche forecast was pretty much maximum for the face in question
2. Had avalanche signs that my limited experience can pick up on their helmetcam footage (let alone anyone who should be going into terrain that required a significant skin without a guide... and it is easier to spot not on a camera)
3. Were told by piste patrol/lifties not to go into that specific area because they WOULD trigger an avalanche (whereas other routes with reasonable conditions (if not quite as deep untracked powder (why might that be...)) were recommended instead)
4. Were extraordinarly lucky to go between trees instead of through them (and get killed by smacking into stuff at serious speed)
So basically any common sense would have avoided needing the bag at all...
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Quote: |
sadly safe travel/ snow risk assessment takes a lot of experience
|
Fully understanding a snowpack and being able to accurately predict all risks does take a lot of experience. Avoiding multiple burials not so much:
- Ski one at a time (honestly this takes no brain power, yet I see plenty of people skiing down in groups)
- use islands of safety (again pretty easy to spot, doesn't require any real training/expertise).
- if traversing across obvious avalanche gully go one at a time.
| Quote: |
So basically any common sense would have avoided needing the bag at all...
|
It's the classic discussion of does protective equipment lead to increased risk taking. I'd say for some people avybags certainly do. As always the best solution is to not get caught in the first place! Airbag should be a last resort.
| Quote: |
Someone working in ski rental told me that quite a few people ask to rent avalanche airbag backpacks ("because they look cool") but did not want the actual airbag mechanism or transceiver and poles - which I find a bit scary too!
|
They may just need a backpack and don't even plan to go off piste/out of bounds. I regularly use my bag without the canister as it's (unsurprisingly) more practical for snowboarding than any non-ski backpack I have. They may already have their own transceiver and poles and it's going to be much better to use equipment they are familiar with. I think without a lot more info about what they are actually doing it's not something to be getting scared about!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
All fair points - but maybe add "leave this gully for another day" as a key decision before crossing (admittedly, one that is very difficult to make in an unguided group already at the top of a gully)!
Sadly, the ski rental discussion involved people renting big powder skis for the day after fresh snowfall, so there was a strong argument for including the canister!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| oui4ski wrote: |
All fair points - but maybe add "leave this gully for another day" as a key decision before crossing (admittedly, one that is very difficult to make in an unguided group already at the top of a gully)!
Sadly, the ski rental discussion involved people renting big powder skis for the day after fresh snowfall, so there was a strong argument for including the canister! |
Fair point about just avoiding the gully if risk is high, as always the best plan is avoid being caught in an avalanche. There are some routes where traversing under an avalanche path or on a convex slope is necessary for access. I see plenty of people not go one at a time, which is an unnecessary risk for multiple burials.
If there's been a huge dump and avy risk is high they may be sticking to safe terrain below 30degrees. As said above there is also the possibility that having th cannister leads to increased risk taking, perhaps they don't trust themselves. I find it weird that anyone planning to ski avalanche terrain and renting a an airbag would choose to not take the cannister. I'm sure it happens, but I doubt it's the norm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@Weathercam, nice pics, and a happy looking puppy! Will be interested to see results of your ‘interference’ experiments. Was going to test my new Barryvox at the weekend, in the ‘large leaf piles’ that reasonably replicate ‘snow’ here in East London. however, the only park with large leaf piles so far is also next to a National Grid station, which has at least 132Kv going in, possibly more… suspect the interference from that would drown any 4.5v arva completely. Will try out just for kicks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| boarder2020 wrote: |
| ... I see plenty of people not go one at a time [through risky bits], which is an unnecessary risk for multiple burials. |
I think it's possibly partly experience too - the more experienced people are, the less likely they are to go for "Chinese downhill" mass starts which have other risks too. It's common for guides to have to instruct people to ride one by one, and it's another reason radios are handy.
(Which reminds me of some accident reports I've read of EU guided parties, where no one at all has a radio or other electronic comms... )
| boarder2020 wrote: |
| ... I find it weird that anyone planning to ski avalanche terrain and renting a an airbag would choose to not take the cannister. I'm sure it happens, but I doubt it's the norm. |
Aye, I could not be arsed to remove mine, even if I was using the bag to carry my board on a bus.
At least pretty common and obvious is the people who don't use and even chop the crotch strap.
That you can't fix.. .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Weathercam wrote: |
Once the snow is deeper up in the hill will do a lot more testing to see if GPS/Phone/Watch has any effect in deeper snow with probes and back-pack etc, today they did not. |
Did you do a range test? Did one a couple of years ago and the searcher having phone off added a lot to the range at which the signal was first picked up. Once picked up in a search, phone wasn't an issue. Also conditions/location weren't ideal with lots of other possible interference.
Sorry don't mean to be teaching granny to suck eggs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
@adithorp, the testing threw up a few questions with the Diract that I was not expecting, so seeking clarification from Ortovox before I make them public!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I heard somewhere and it may not be true but I still have it in my mind when skiing is that once your head is buried you have a 1:6 chance of getting out unscathed. With the holy trinity plus friends it jumps to 2:6 so still not great. That’s why my focus has always been on not getting buried in the first place. I remember being above a slightly sketchy slope and the instructor asking if everyone had ‘kit” before launching down the mountain. In my mind front and centre is that having the “kit” should not change the decision on risk level.
One thing that’s not talked about so much, but which in both real searches and on mountain practice significantly improves rescue performance is management/organisation of the search and rescue. I’ve found a reluctance in a group of peers for anyone to step up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Weathercam wrote: |
| @adithorp, the testing threw up a few questions with the Diract that I was not expecting, so seeking clarification from Ortovox before I make them public! |
Understandable. Keep us updated once you can.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| jbob wrote: |
I heard somewhere and it may not be true but I still have it in my mind when skiing is that once your head is buried you have a 1:6 chance of getting out unscathed. With the holy trinity plus friends it jumps to 2:6 so still not great. That’s why my focus has always been on not getting buried in the first place. I remember being above a slightly sketchy slope and the instructor asking if everyone had ‘kit” before launching down the mountain. In my mind front and centre is that having the “kit” should not change the decision on risk level.
One thing that’s not talked about so much, but which in both real searches and on mountain practice significantly improves rescue performance is management/organisation of the search and rescue. I’ve found a reluctance in a group of peers for anyone to step up. |
this is the plot that sticks in my head...
if buried then pretty much your only chance of survival is companion rescue.
you basically have 15 minutes to save a life : waiting for a heli or mountain rescue isn't good enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In which case you want your companions to have search training, practice, the wherewithall to use it under pressure AND beacons with the best range, clearest directions (and best softwear). That comes with other stuff that you probably won't use.
As I see it, it's not a binary choice between learning and equipment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| adithorp wrote: |
| As I see it, it's not a binary choice between learning and equipment. |
^ As mentioned : almost all x3 antenna digital beacons are decent these days (*)
However : your chances of rescue within 15 minutes are massively enhanced if there is only one victim!
Hence my gripes about multi-burial mode becoming a primary differentiating factor for beacons.
In reality other stuff is way more important and arguably simplicity, rather than features, should be valued?
(*) maybe avoid Pieps one with the dodgy switch? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| BobinCH wrote: |
Identical summary - 15 mins |
Yeah : the "15 minute" conclusion has been virtually identical across multiple studies on both sides of Atlantic for a few decades. In theory slightly more people die from trauma in North America (higher tree line) than Europe (open bowls) : though on both continents very few make it beyond 15mins.
Fwiw : there have been a a couple of rare incidents where people survived as long as 24hrs!
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| jbob wrote: |
| I heard somewhere and it may not be true but I still have it in my mind when skiing is that once your head is buried you have a 1:6 chance of getting out unscathed. With the holy trinity plus friends it jumps to 2:6 so still not great. That’s why my focus has always been on not getting buried in the first place. I remember being above a slightly sketchy slope and the instructor asking if everyone had ‘kit” before launching down the mountain. In my mind front and centre is that having the “kit” should not change the decision on risk level. |
That 1:6 might be true for "once your head is buried". But if I have data right in my memory, it's still so, that somewhere around 90% of people get caught in avalanche end up on surface and normally walk away (or maybe walk away with broken bone or two). But before someone understands this completely wrong way, I did NOT mean that avalanche is nothing to worry about and you have very little chance to die, so all is good.
Statistically you really have very little chance to die. I just saw that in Austria there's about 15 deaths a year on average from avalanches. This is honestly very very little number consider amount of people and amount of time people spend in mountains. But thing is, it can happen to anyone and it can happen anywhere, so I certainly don't want to be one of those few. That's reason, why airbag is always with me. It doesn't give me magic escape route, which also means I don't push more because I would think I'm safe(er), but if something would go wrong, it does give you few percentage (number varies based on this how someone uses statistics data and can be from few percent to 97%) more chances to you might walk away. But on first place, I still take care that I don't end up in avalanche. But with snow, you can never be 100% sure you are safe and you did everything 100% right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@primoz, would be interested in your source of avie stats. I've ended up on the surface, and walked away ... But am ever grateful it wasn't anything different ..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| hamilton wrote: |
| @primoz, would be interested in your source of avie stats. I've ended up on the surface, and walked away ... But am ever grateful it wasn't anything different .. |
Reliable sats on % buried hard to find (... the ones above look about right). Most small avalanches where people just go for a small ride remain unreported & unrecorded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
@Haggis_Trap, Like my 3 in 3 years  Since then and really upping my game I have never even come close to a slide and train a fair bit both in avoidance and emergency response.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@Haggis_Trap, It's bloody scary how much power even a small one has. These days I ski much more off piste and always feel that I am losing nothing and gaining potentially a great deal by avoiding terrain or hiking back up if there is any doubt or suspicion at the back of my mind about stability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@Haggis_Trap, I seem to recall someone skiing past me after I managed to extract myself from hanging upside down from a tree in the forest with one ski caught having lost the other after being caught at the beginning of a biggish slide
Did and does still haunt me, one reason why I prett well stick to <30% in the winter out in the open or stay, carefully in the forest.
Spring I'm not so bothered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
