 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Avalanche, 1 morte.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
The Swiss/French comments are pretty damning regarding the decision making of the skiers involved.
"Elle avait activé son airbag mais qui ne l'avait pas maintenue à la surface."
That's a bummer (not that I've got an airbag), but having had the presence of mind to pull the cord, she'd have hoped that it would have worked. 
Last edited by Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see? on Wed 19-12-12 23:49; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
It's a notorious avalanche trap and not the place to have been today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Steve Sparks, yep, really not a good place to ski after a big dump, though pretty well travelled at other times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Horrible outcome....
Whilst Col du Mouche is locally notorious it doesnt take much imagination to see how some young skiers could have ended up there (normally its a very easy off piste route). Knowing Verbier I suspect there will have been tracks all over the mountain even at risk 4 or 5. No point arm chair quarter backing as we have all probably made dubious decisions at somepoint (just been luckier with the outcome!).
2 simple observations...
1) This slope is about 200m from the Tortin lift. Its what some people would wrongly call "sidecountry".
2) Another case of Airbag not helping (whilst airbags do increase your chances the 97% survival rate quoted by ABS on front page of their website / advertising seems morally wrong).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Massive wake up call for me ....
1. I ve just bought an Airbag
2. I ve dropped in off that ridge quite often in the past and could easily imagined having done it in those condition on a 3 out of 5 day.
And if I normally ski all off piste guided and fully equipped feel I need to reassess then what hope is there for the "its not really off piste if you can see the lift so I don t need any gear " brigade?
To be fair to ABS (not what i have bought by the way) the article doesnt specify what brand she was wearing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's awful news. Agree that it is an obvious problem slope but as Haggis Trap points out it is close to the lift and there is no obvious demarcation/indication of what is controlled and what is not. Obviously they're blasting Chassoure to defend the lift towers (down the S couloir etc). But I've never been clear where they stop - I wouldn't ski the couloirs back into Chassoure past the S couloir reached from the the banana traverse of death for that exact reason - irrespective of what's on the flag. That's probably a hard one to manage if your knowledge of the area isn't great.
| Quote: |
2) Another case of Airbag not helping (whilst airbags do increase your chances the 97% survival rate quoted by ABS on front page of their website / advertising seems morally wrong).
|
If I'm reading that correctly it was a 1.8m crown. No piece of safety gear is going to protect you from that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
very sad, all the more so as I've skied that slope a lot and hold my hand up and say without "the gear" on occasion.
One thing to note from the pictures I've seen is that the split appears to be at a definite convexity. I don't know if this was skied over or if she was just caught below it but it does reinforce how attending a course or gaining knowledge is as important as buying expensive kit.
FWIW as soon as you cross the ridge dividing tortin/chassoure from col de mouche I think its pretty clear that you are off on your own.
None of the above is to criticise the victim, there but for the grace of god.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| gilo wrote: |
very sad, all the more so as I've skied that slope a lot and hold my hand up and say without "the gear" on occasion.
One thing to note from the pictures I've seen is that the split appears to be at a definite convexity. I don't know if this was skied over or if she was just caught below it but it does reinforce how attending a course or gaining knowledge is as important as buying expensive kit. |
Explain convexity please - is this higher risk of fracture as slope shape becomes convex?
| Quote: |
FWIW as soon as you cross the ridge dividing tortin/chassoure from col de mouche I think its pretty clear that you are off on your own.
None of the above is to criticise the victim, there but for the grace of god..... |
+1 (to both)
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I would say that is definitely not to be mistaken for part of 'Chassoure' and even to someone new to the slope that would be obvious.
I'd also agree that with the volume that came down, gear or no gear, your chances are pretty limited if that drops on you. When I first saw the smaller picture I thought it was the 'gully' in Chassoure.
As above, no personal criticism of the individual, sat here in my small but not insignificant greenhouse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| mishmash wrote: |
| gilo wrote: |
very sad, all the more so as I've skied that slope a lot and hold my hand up and say without "the gear" on occasion.
One thing to note from the pictures I've seen is that the split appears to be at a definite convexity. I don't know if this was skied over or if she was just caught below it but it does reinforce how attending a course or gaining knowledge is as important as buying expensive kit. |
Explain convexity please - is this higher risk of fracture as slope shape becomes convex?
|
Yes, though in this case could be referring to a smaller convexity (ie hump or rollover etc) on the main slope (someone who knows the place will know better).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Explain convexity please |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
thanks all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Haggis_Trap, 's diagram explains it well. if the ground is dropping away from you it will support the snow less well than if the ground in front is flattening out (concavity). So even on the same face the bumps and dips will have varying degrees of stability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Haggis_Trap, Sidecountry can be avalanche terrain too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
there is no obvious demarcation/indication of what is controlled and what is not.
|
What does this mean in a European context?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
gorilla, Tortin is not avalanche controlled either. At least this is what the sign says "marked itinerary, not patrolled and not controlled for avalanches".
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
What does this mean in a European context?
|
I'll attempt to be clearer here as on re-reading, my initial post was open to some misinterpretation. This avalanche happened adjacent to an itinerary run. Above the itinerary there is gazex and Televerbier clearly use that to defend the lift towers and make the area safe for skiers. Further along the traverse towards the slope where the accident happened, there is no gazex and I've never seen evidence of them controlling the furthest chutes above the traverse closest to the accident site. As such, as you traverse towards the area where the accident occurred you move from a slope that might feel very safe through to one that is potentially very dangerous - as the report above shows.
Before entering the itinerary, you pass a "you do this at your own risk" disclaimer, which the world and his cat ignore as the slope is obviously avalanche controlled. You don't pass any markers or indicators of further danger when you move from the controlled area to the area where the accident happened. Unlike in other parts of the resort or in other resorts, there is no rope to duck or anything like that - as you move from comparatively safe to potentially dangerous. That's what I meant by demarcation.
As Haggis Trap points out, there is no such thing as "sidecountry" and you are either in danger or you aren't. I think you could easily enter this area from the intinerary with a false sense of security, despite knowing that it is off piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
pam w, All the area there is said to be not controlled for avalanches, however a part before the ridge is a marked Chassoure - Tortin itinerary. I guess the main difference is that when something happens on Tortin a skier will be covered by resort insurance (unless the skier is there when it's officially closed by the resort), for Col de Mouche he'll need to be covered for off-piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
gorilla, Tortin is not avalanche controlled either. At least this is what the sign says "marked itinerary, not patrolled and not controlled for avalanches".
|
In practice they bomb it and people routinely but wrongly factor that into their decision making. Televerbier bomb periodically Gentianes from the cable car for the same reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there was some discussion recently about whether "itineraries" count as pistes for the purpose of insurance. Did we ever discover a definitive answer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pam w, I don't know about other places but Verbier will write up accidents on its itineraries as off-piste. We had this discussion for real a few years ago following a bad crash on Gentianes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
gorilla, thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
^ Thats something I have wondered before, along with the issue that Gorilla flagged up, how far can you go from the poles before you have left the Itinerary.
For comparison the Arlberg Iterneries (To the best of my knowledge) are marked "Avalanche Controlled But not patrolled and Not Pisted"
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Picture of the Col Du Mouche slide here (www.freeride.se)
The really scary thing is that it ripped all the way to ground. Main couloir has lots of tracks on it and looks well skied.... Sadly I can see how that could easily catch someone out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
