 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Yes, no, maybe?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Mostly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
On the back of the Val d'Isere avalanche, which i'm guessing this thread is on the back of, i had a chat with my wife last night and we've both agreed that i won't be skiing off piste anywhere if the scale is 3 or above. She questioned why i'd even ski if it was at 2 and i had to explain to her the inherent responsibilities each skier must take for themselves and 2 is reasonably safe to ski as long as you do nothing stupid. At 3 or above the risk increases ten-fold.
So, yes, by my thinking, it is safe to ski off piste, as long as you are prepared, take account of the conidtions and ski with someone who knows/guides the area very very well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
It depends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
shoogly, a blanket ban at L3 and above? What about low angle slopes, perhaps through the trees? Short pitches with no exposure above them and gentle run outs below them? Resorts spend a lot of time at L3 and by the time it drops to L2 you often have to spend time and effort hiking to reach untracked snow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shoogly, there goes your powder then, with a reasonable amount of new snow the level will be at least 3. Plus as you probably know even whilst the 'resort' is on 3 there'll be plenty of places with safe skiing (as on 2 there will still be dangerous places).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Boredsurfing wrote: |
of course not, by the same token it's not safe to cross the road....
|
Agreed, of course not.
On the other hand, you watch what's been happening to the weather over the last month or so, has the snow pack stabilised or not (see Davidof's analysis of yesterday's tragic avalanche:http://pistehors.com/news/forums/viewthread/774/), what's the wind loading, slope angle, what about terrain traps, ski one at a time, use islands of safety, etc, etc. The avalanche score is only one element in the decision.
Having analysed all that, it's still not safe, but it is less unsafe.
It is definitely unsafe to launch yourself onto some virgin powder slope without having assessed all those things first, regardless of the avalanche bulletin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
What I can't get out of my mind is that, in the two latest Val d'Isere cases, two very experienced and respected guides were involved. So, my conclusion is, at best, that
| Quote: |
Having analysed all that, it's still not safe, but it is less unsafe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hurtle, yep, but you can say that for pretty much anything in life. At least skiing brings huge rewards for your risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Hurtle, there must be at least hundreds of thousands of skiers spend some time off piste each winter in France. How many deaths and serious injuries are there from off-piste skiing? The odds aren't that frightening. Quick look at Piste Hors shows for 2008/09 there were 18 avalanche deaths when ski touring and 9 when off-piste skiing.
So it's right to conclude that there is an element of risk, but that is the same for all things in life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
clarky999, yes indeed, though some wusses like me have to factor in fear outweighing pleasure. Luckily, I don't have to do that with my other principal hobby, which is making/listening to music.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob@rar and clarky999 both very very good points. I think i was trying to say i wouldn't take any silly risks at 3 or above (has been known just to get a good run). The conversation came about because my wife asked me why i'd take any risk at all.
I think i've maybe said something there that i probably don't mean and certainly didn't give enough thought too... it was the word powder that did it!
I owe you both a virtual pint!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
rob@rar,
| Quote: |
The odds aren't that frightening.
|
I appreciate that the odds aren't. But that's no help to someone who is scared of the actual, physical consequence of the risk.
Sorry, my phobic contributions are not helpful to this thread. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Hurtle, that fear is probably a good thing, it'll help keep you safe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Hurtle, This event, so soon after the last one in Val has made me reconsider my plans for a guided off piste day next week. I had been discussing the death over Christmas with locals in the Melezes bar and all were saying that the base was very unstable this year. The early snow fall and subsequent rain were to blame, they said.
I had come to the conclusion that doing an off piste day with an expert local guide would make a level 3 day 100% safe. I will probably still do it as I realise that nothing is safe but this latest accident has certainly made me think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| bar shaker wrote: |
| I had come to the conclusion that doing an off piste day with an expert local guide would make a level 3 day 100% safe. |
100% safe? No such thing. So you avoid the off-piste, but someone on piste clatters in to you at high speed causing serious injury or worse...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| bar shaker wrote: |
| I had come to the conclusion that doing an off piste day with an expert local guide would make a level 3 day 100% safe. |
100% safe? No such thing. So you avoid the off-piste, but someone on piste clatters in to you at high speed causing serious injury or worse... |
As happened to one of the guide in the article above ^^^
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
rob@rar,
| Quote: |
but someone on piste clatters in to you
|
or you simply slip on some compacted snow in the car park and break your wrist so badly it needs 5 pins to set it. As my wife did 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Not that it will help Hurtle's anxiety but does anyone know the stats of death/serious injury on and off piste and crossing the road, taking into account the number of people doing each.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
i've seen it said that the most dangerous bit of a day's skiing is the drive to the resort but i do not have figures to back that up
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I choose not to, but that's not really about personal safety, it's just about choice and what I enjoy about skiing. I do many other things, including motorcycling on the road, which are statistically more dangerous than off-piste skiing. Life is full of risks, it's a question of balancing risk versus enjoyment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Very tragic. I recall from PH and Meteo France that the risk was 2 becoming 3.
The pic at HAT shows bare ground and there has been mention of a depth hoar issue. With a mountain guide, we found significant depth hoar at Tignes before Christmas at approx 2700m and the thought then was that it would only increase and become an enduring instability throughout the season.
I wonder if anyone out there is digging pits at the popular off piste spots and having a look? Is it worth spending 30 mins each day digging a pit, and if with a guide even insisting that a pit be dug? - or do they dig one automatically?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
queen bodecia,
| Quote: |
it's a question of balancing risk versus enjoyment.
|
Exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
colinstone, check the thread about a new avi tool in the Equipments section for thoughts on that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
Hurtle, there must be at least hundreds of thousands of skiers spend some time off piste each winter in France. How many deaths and serious injuries are there from off-piste skiing? The odds aren't that frightening. Quick look at Piste Hors shows for 2008/09 there were 18 avalanche deaths when ski touring and 9 when off-piste skiing.
So it's right to conclude that there is an element of risk, but that is the same for all things in life. |
I wonder how many on piste deaths there were in 2008/09, would be an interesting statistic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| colinstone wrote: |
| Is it worth spending 30 mins each day digging a pit, and if with a guide even insisting that a pit be dug? - or do they dig one automatically? |
Problem with pits is , 50 yards away from the one you dug the situation could be very different....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
The conversation came about because my wife asked me why i'd take any risk at all
|
It irks me when people ask that. Did you ask her why she doesn't wear a crash helmet when she travels by car? Head injuries in car crashes are a lot more common than avalanche deaths. (Or maybe she does wear a crash helmet in a car). Of course that's to compare apples and pears but it's right that, given the amount of time we all spend in cars, often at very high speeds in close proximity to people doing equally high speeds in the opposite direction and a few metres away, the lifetime risk of injury is considerable.
The avalanche risk here is 4/5 today - all the lifties in Notre Dame de Bellecombe were wearing bibs saying so, which I thought was a very good idea.
My main fear remains falling on the road and having a badly fractured risk - like boredsurfing's wife.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| kitenski wrote: |
| colinstone wrote: |
| Is it worth spending 30 mins each day digging a pit, and if with a guide even insisting that a pit be dug? - or do they dig one automatically? |
Problem with pits is , 50 yards away from the one you dug the situation could be very different.... |
Well, yes, possibly for the upper layers, but if pit has significant depth hoar, which seems to be the case in Vd'I, then I would surmise that this would be an issue across the local area/region. Perhaps the pisteurs should be encouraging guides etc digging pits and reporting back with the location and findings - a bit like ships reporting weather conditions at sea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
colinstone, but equally if there is no depth hoar/weak layer in the pit you dig, that doesn't mean it won't be there a few metres away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
kitenski, i seem to recall 40 or so deaths on average in the alps per year, so perhaps you are safer off piste ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| shoogly wrote: |
| On the back of the Val d'Isere avalanche, which i'm guessing this thread is on the back of, i had a chat with my wife last night and we've both agreed that i won't be skiing off piste anywhere if the scale is 3 or above. She questioned why i'd even ski if it was at 2 and i had to explain to her the inherent responsibilities each skier must take for themselves and 2 is reasonably safe to ski as long as you do nothing stupid. At 3 or above the risk increases ten-fold. |
The problem is often "no risk no fun". Slopes that won't avalanche are often too flat or snowbare. The avy warnings are very general and the local risk varies esp. with wind and sun. A guide seeks to keep the risk minimal but maximize the fun, sometimes they unfortunately get caught out.
| shoogly wrote: |
| So, yes, by my thinking, it is safe to ski off piste, as long as you are prepared, take account of the conidtions and ski with someone who knows/guides the area very very well. |
But isn't that what they were doing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
so does anyone know what degree the slopes that avalanched were in VD ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| rayscoops wrote: |
| kitenski, i seem to recall 40 or so deaths on average in the alps per year, so perhaps you are safer off piste ? |
Which is a tiny weeny % of the number of skiers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Boris wrote: |
| rayscoops wrote: |
| kitenski, i seem to recall 40 or so deaths on average in the alps per year, so perhaps you are safer off piste ? |
Which is a tiny weeny % of the number of skiers. |
But alot more than off piste deaths.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
More total deaths I'm sure but would find it hard to believe that a higher % of on-piste skiers are killed than off-piste.
Granted bad news for the people concerned but statistically on-piste would be safer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
In the US, more people are killed ironing their trousers than off-piste skiing each year (don't ask me how !).
A life with no risk would be very boring - think the spaceship in Wall-E
I try to read the Avalanche Report every day. This is because it can focus on what has changed for that day, rather than the whole picture, so you need to have read them all. Depth Hoar on some N facing ridges & slopes was mentioned over a week ago. It's still there. If forms over time, just because you didn't find any a week ago, doesn't mean it isn't there now.
Depth Hoar is nasty because unless you want to go around digging full depth holes, it can be very difficult to detect. Slides where depth hoar is the failure layer have a tendency to be large and very dense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
brian
brian
Guest
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
