 Poster: A snowHead
|
I once heard someone explain why all drivers should learn in 2CVs. The case made was that they were so unstable they made for better drivers. You needed to brake well before the corner, corner at a suitable speed and acceleration was only so so there after. Learn in one of those and you really learnt speed and car control.
At half-term on the red back to Siviez from Plan de fou my 5 year old daughter twice nearly got taken out by pretty good skiers. Now she isn't particularly fast and she doesn't make sudden turns so she isn't hard to spot to avoid. It's a wide enough slope if you're good enough to avoid anyone without stopping.
The first woman screeched to a halt covering her in snow. At least she had the decently to say desole.
The second, I guess about 14, tried to avoid her at last moment, clipped her but fell quite heavily herself. Unfortunately my French wasn't up to it but her father (assumed) was left in no doubt as to how I felt about it.
I have a dilemma about whether to ski/shield directly behind/uphill or leave space so she is easily visible. This time I was leaving clear space.
Maybe all skiers should spend the first 10 weeks on straight skis. Then they would learn to control their speed. As it is, their skis are usually way better than their ability.
I'm actually afraid it doesn't stack up because these were definitely not 10 week skiers but I'd like to have put them on straight skis and sent them down the other side of Plan de fou to see how fast they went on a serious slope.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Sun 10-03-13 2:42; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Deux Chevaux's and skiing have little, if nothing, in common. Accidents happen. JMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Yep, probably right. I learnt ti ski in Scotland in the 70's. Prehistoric kit. As a learner speed was scary. Kit was rubbish.
Last Jan was skiing with a friend who was on his second week. (First was 4 or 5 years ago) By day two he was hurtling down every red run of the 3 valleys. He survived. Just. I do wish that he has been on skis from the 70's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
It is never acceptable to hit a duckling. Never.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Nickski, +1 for early learning, and perhaps never being licensed off, long skinny skis.
Would help with the endemic obesity as well...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
It is never acceptable to hit a duckling. Never.
|
This is a stupid remark. How are you supposed to avoid the one which decides to ride up a bank and then drops onto the piste without looking, half a metre in front of you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So your solution to stop people skiing too fast is to put them on skis that are harder to control? Seems illogical.
I've only skied in the carving ski era, but surely people still got hit on the slopes in the old days as well!?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't get these comments on snowheads that old kit was appreciably any slower or intrinsically safer. Modern gear is easier to learn on, particularly off-piste, but confident skiers will always travel at the limit of their ability - that's part of the thrill. There were people skiing beyond their ability in the 80's, as I'm sure there were in the 30's, and the speeds involved wouldn't be much different.
However since mini-shep will be starting skiing next season, I expect to be back on here supporting crap skis for all, soft fencing, hard fencing, a fine system, speed-cops, competence certificates, gps-tracking, less grooming, more grooming, segregated slopes, helmets, on-piste beacons and any other traffic-calming/safety measures which appear to fit the criteria for any perceived threat to my offspring. Anything other that take responsibility for her safety and accept that accidents happen. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
I like the 2CV analogy, but I doubt many motorists or skiers would live past their second week to enjoy life anyway.
shep, I'm with you on this one. I have a 10 yr old and a 12yr old who have now done 2 weeks skiing. Not too hairy, except for the time when they (and most other people) are picking their way at a gentle speed down, for instance, a steepish bit of red. All of a sudden, a ski instructor/boarder/expert skier comes hurtling through the mass of people following the fall line, cutting a straight line through the 'S's at a breakneck speed. They may be perfectly in control, I am sure they are, but the margin for error is tiny and the potential carnage is horrendous. By all means take the straight line down, feel free to ski at 2-3 times everyone else's speed, but not 5 times faster........please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of accidents would be avoided IF people on the snow followed the basic rules!
The simple problem is there are rules but nobody with the responsibilty to enforce them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Hehe, I learned to ski on $40 worth of yard sale straight skis, although I don't see how that helps compare to learn on shaped skis.
| Lizzard wrote: |
| Quote: |
It is never acceptable to hit a duckling. Never.
|
This is a stupid remark. How are you supposed to avoid the one which decides to ride up a bank and then drops onto the piste without looking, half a metre in front of you? |
Funny you mentioned that. Just a week ago some idiot boarder kid (maybe 13 or 15?) came flying out of trees (where sign clearly states no skiing allowed) and lands right in front of me (not even 20 meters out after getting off the lift), crash ensues and he cracked my binding. Can't exactly make him pay for it so I'm now $500 short and looking for new skis. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Lizzard wrote: |
| Quote: |
It is never acceptable to hit a duckling. Never.
|
This is a stupid remark. How are you supposed to avoid the one which decides to ride up a bank and then drops onto the piste without looking, half a metre in front of you? |
Bit harsh, since the comment seems tongue-in-cheek. Your example is unavoidable but still never acceptable in the eyes of some self-righteous adults. I stopped the car recently to help a kid I saw fall off her bike. Five minutes later was close to being lynched by an angry french mob who had decided I'd knocked her off!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Lizzard wrote: |
| Quote: |
It is never acceptable to hit a duckling. Never.
|
This is a stupid remark. How are you supposed to avoid the one which decides to ride up a bank and then drops onto the piste without looking, half a metre in front of you? |
You've been on the mountains long enough to know the FIS rules, which make you absolutely responsible for avoiding any skier in front/downhill of you ... unless they have started from stationary without looking uphill. Why insult someone who's made a perfectly reasonable comment?
Since you're referring to someone who hasn't stopped, and is simply turning, you have to avoid them. It's as simple and straightforward as that - a skier on the move can make any unpredictable action they like (though they're well advised to realise that many don't know/care about the FIS rules) and expect not to have someone collide with them.
If you think the rule is too difficult to comply with, because others on the mountain aren't moving in a way you approve of ... best to take up another sport. We all have a real duty to avoid colliding, by skiing in control and safely avoiding those ahead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
I find when skiing at a fair whack that the best way to avoid people (and please don't take this the wrong way) is to aim for them as they start a turn. By the time you get there they'll be gone and moving further away from you with every passing fraction of a second.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
The FIS rules would be observed and ALL skiers should ski in a manner that protects themselves and others regardless of who may be right or wrong.
It reminds me of all the self righteous cyclists who put themselves in danger because they have rights under the Highway Code. On skis, bikes anything dangerous, look after yourselves people. I'm sure you'd rather ski a run a couple of seconds slower and ski the rest of the week as oppose to end in hospital. If people ally want some thrills hire an instructor / guide and go do some off piste, I've had far more adrenalin that way than bombing down a piste!
Be safe all 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Cyclists have rights tobe on the road under the highway code MJS, . The danger is getting run down by people who think they have not.
The 2CV is the most fun car I ever owned.
Look after yourself is not very far off "look after number 1". Look out for everybody and respect their rights, would be my offering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Chris Bish, my first 'date' collected me in his 2CV and I have pretty vivid memories of being driven down a steep hill in what felt like a Force 8 gale. Any first date nerves paled into insignificance 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Quote: |
Deux Chevaux's and skiing have little, if nothing, in common.
|
Bit OT, but one of my favourite ways of describing what your legs need to do when skiing is to describe a 2CV going around a bend..........
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
aim for them as they start a turn. By the time you get there they'll be gone and moving further away from you with every passing fraction of a second.
|
Unless they fall. Or change their mind about the turn. Or have to take sudden evasive action themselves. When I had a crash back in January I was suddenly nose to nose, about to crash head on, with a big Frenchmen. We both turned - the same way, unfortunately and the ensuing crash fractured my pelvis. I was going uphill, he was coming downhill but I don't think it was conclusively either of our faults. I was "carrying my way" into a lift entrance (there was no queue) and he was transiting the same area, aiming for a different lift. I needed a bit of speed to get up to the lift without walking but wasn't going very fast. He wasn't either, but as it was a head on collision our combined momentum was considerable. He was suddenly just "there". It transpired that he had taken evasive action to avoid somebody else, immediately before, so his trajectory (which I suppose I had been mentally mapping, along with that of other skiers moving through a rather confused area) changed very suddenly. His skis didn't release and he hurt a knee but was able to ski off (he stuck around, was very reluctant to ski off, nice guy). My immediate thoughts after the crash (apart from "O sh*t" and "Ow") was that the crash was my fault, as I'd not allowed for his trajectory - but when he explained rather apologetically that he'd taken sudden evasive action just before we crashed I thought it was probably "just one of those things", 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. Arguably I should have been travelling slowly enough to avoid him (and prepared to walk the last 15 metres if necessary) like the kid who drops out of the trees onto the piste right in front of you. And arguably his route to the other lift should have given the entrance of the one I was aiming for a wider berth. The rules of the road are not too clear when one skier is travelling uphill and the other downhill! One thing which would be useful would be a "head on collision avoidance" rule - if we'd both been in boats we'd have known to pass port to port and all would have been well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Comedy Goldsmith wrote: |
| Lizzard wrote: |
| Quote: |
It is never acceptable to hit a duckling. Never.
|
This is a stupid remark. How are you supposed to avoid the one which decides to ride up a bank and then drops onto the piste without looking, half a metre in front of you? |
You've been on the mountains long enough to know the FIS rules, which make you absolutely responsible for avoiding any skier in front/downhill of you ... unless they have started from stationary without looking uphill. Why insult someone who's made a perfectly reasonable comment?
Since you're referring to someone who hasn't stopped, and is simply turning, you have to avoid them. It's as simple and straightforward as that - a skier on the move can make any unpredictable action they like (though they're well advised to realise that many don't know/care about the FIS rules) and expect not to have someone collide with them.
If you think the rule is too difficult to comply with, because others on the mountain aren't moving in a way you approve of ... best to take up another sport. We all have a real duty to avoid colliding, by skiing in control and safely avoiding those ahead. |
I looked up the rule and there is also another one about making sure it's clear when entering a trail. Anyone dropping in from outside the trail is certainly doing that and it's up to them to make sure it's clear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| Quote: |
aim for them as they start a turn. By the time you get there they'll be gone and moving further away from you with every passing fraction of a second.
|
Unless they fall. Or change their mind about the turn. Or have to take sudden evasive action themselves. |
If that's the case then speed probably is an irrelevance - all it will affect is the severity of the collision. When passing someone I always aim to give them the maximum room possible for unpredictable events to happen and try to pass behind them immediately as they commence a turn to avoid spooking anyone and to minimise the risk of them turning back into me. Accidents will always happen - we can only take every reasonable precaution to avoid them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Bish, my point being that if you take the attitude that you have rights therefore are protected you open yourself up to being clobbered.
I know my rights on a bike but choose to cycle in a way that is the safest regardless of whether I have to give up my rights.
For me looking after number one is making sure I don't come to harm and also don't cause harm to others, because if I do, generally number one suffers
I'm all in for safety for all and all helping each other out, it may just come out differently from me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jimmer, shep, I don't have a solution. Any solution lies with people who ski at the limit or beyond their ability. These were good skiers technically, they just weren't good at calculating others' trajectory relative to theirs and it really wouldn't of been that hard. That's the bit I find worrying, daughter was in clear view, traveling slowly and on both occasions she hadn't made any sudden changes in direction. Two incidents on the same slope in 2 minutes that required really poor judgement by the uphill, apparently competent skier.
There's a bit lower down that is less steep but narrow in places and can be bumpy. Very few people honk down that and I feel a lot safer on behalf of my daughter. I guess it's skiers who are pretty good, good enough to honk it down big, wide open runs but not as good as they think they are, that are the biggest danger.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Nickski, I wasn't getting on your case, it's an interesting subject and about to become of huge relevance to me over the coming years! You are correct that those people skiing at their limit are solely responsible for their behaviour; so if they don't see the need to modify it there's nothing you can do. IMHO you are incorrect in looking to them for the "solution" to your problem, i.e. that of exposing your daughter to the danger they create.
That solution lies firmly in your hands, until she's old enough to be responsible for herself. So you minimise all foreseeable risks, and then balance the remaining danger against your desire to take her skiing. Then you decide if, and where, to go skiing. I gather you were on the steep section of a red home-run with your "slow-traveling" 5-year old? If she can't yet keep up with the general flow of traffic in that location it may be that you're not minimising the foreseeable risks as well as possible - I don't know, I wasn't there. I would carefully research your daily route selection taking into account her skill level and the prevailing conditions, and I'd want to be damn sure my terrain choices were for her enjoyment and not my own.
It can't have been pleasant to experience those two close-shaves, but they happen all the time and yet skiing is still statistically a relatively safe sport. If you do all you can and still find yourself with the same dilemma then maybe you have to accept that for you the residual risk outweighs the benefits and stop her skiing? What you can't do is shift your responsibility onto other skiers.
Good luck and happy trails to both of you .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shep, I'll take that in the spirit I believe it's intended. I hope but don't expect you will avoid experiencing something similar sooner or later. My daughter likes skiing the 'off-piste', as she calls it, at the side of the piste and I now understand why the instructors do that, apart from the skills development. On the even more benign near by blue my nephew got taken out so badly it partly stripped the binding from one ski. That's one of the reasons I got a back protector for her.
Your best bet will to be choose a smallish resort with a low intermediate reputation. Avoid the people who are good enough to go fast but not good enough that they should.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
The 2cv was aimed at farmers wanting an all terrain vehicle, a family car to take to market that could also drive across fields hence huge suspension travel; thus OP should be about flex extension and steering allowing appropriate speed control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Indeed. And anyone that thinks they are unstable has presumably never driven one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Quote: |
I gather you were on the steep section of a red home-run with your "slow-traveling" 5-year old?
|
Sometime those "home runs" - and not just the red ones - are pretty lethal towards the end of the day. Even without a slow travelling 5 year old I would generally choose to download.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
. (I 
.)
