UKC

Out of interest who carries avalanche equipment (eg. transceiver, shovel, probe) whilst climbing or even winter walking?

During the winter I mainly ski tour but every so often do a bit of winter walking or climbing. I was out on my own today and out of habit took my transceiver, shovel and probe with me but there is little point carrying it if no-one else around is, although seems even more pointless leaving it in the car!

In reply to Paulww:

I carry my shovel and probe.
Wouldn't like to think if I saw something happen I would be of no help.
The shovel also makes a handy sledge.


Dan.

In reply to Paulww:

I don't personally know anyone that does.

In reply to DANNYdjb:

That was partly my thinking to.

I would tend to say that more "backcountry" skiers and boarders in Scotland take kit with them than climbers and walkers, although my feeling is that in Scotland climbers and walkers are perhaps more vulnerable to avalanches.

In reply to Paulww:

Depends on conditions and destination, but will pack a shovel and probe.

In reply to Paulww:

My walking poles are Leki Extreme's
they convert to Avalanche probes

winter walking I do carry a shovel.

however when winter climbing I do not carry these items,
as there is a limit to what you can sensibly carry

In reply to Paulww: I own a shovel and occasionally carry it when walking, rarely when climbing.

i don't know of any others who carry avalanche kit when climbing either

In reply to RichardP: >"when winter climbing I do not carry these items, as there is a limit to what you can sensibly carry"<

A skier carries rope, axe, crampons, skins, transceiver, shovel, probe (plus the same food, drink, spare clothes a winter climber would need), and of course skis. Genuine question, how does a shovel, probe & transceiver tip a winter climber's pack over the edge of sensibility ?

In reply to moffatross:
Don't carry them for climbing in Scotland or here in France.
Try lifting a climbers sack with a 60m rope, crampons, pair of axes and rack of gear and you will be able to answer your own question.
By the way it's rare for me to carry a rope while skiing or winter walking unless on glaciated terrain, as I would climb unroped on grade 1, I also have lightweight axe and crampons for skiing if I think I need them.
I would say the more experienced one is the less you carry, and I really cut the weight down if at all possible rarely having even spare clothing apart from gloves.
Perhaps the amount your carrying to ski explains your peculiar skiing style,

In reply to Paulww:

You'll probably find a few old threads on this if you hunt around - it comes up fairly regularly. A couple of points I'd throw in:-

The safety gear we carry and the way in which we travel should be decided on the basis of the conditions in front of us, not the activity we think we're there to enjoy. The snow slope doesn't care whether you think you're a climber or skier or golfer.

If you're travelling solo then wearing a transceiver is still a good idea. Of course if you're buried it won't do you much good (unless you're particularly lucky and another party finds you) but you'll make it much easier, quicker & safer for those who come looking for you to locate your body.

In reply to Paulww:

For this season I have started to carry probe and shovel and when I scrape the money together a transceiver too. Whether it's a winter walk, technical climbing or back country skiing, I believe these items with proper training and avalanche/snow conditions knowledge can be of value. As well as it being part of personal safety within a group, as solo I would say it is as important too. If I was to witness an avalanche then I'd like to think I could start searching for casualties. Obviously avoidance/prevention of avalanches is best, but humans and nature can be unpredictable so having the tools and training in the heat of the moment could well save some lives.

In reply to Paulww:

I carry shovel and transceiver when skiing because then I'm more likely to be in terrain where there's a risk of avalanche than when I'm climbing. Most avalanches I've seen (at a distance, Gran Paradiso area) in one day skiing : 15 - 20.

I've chosen to avoid climbing areas (e.g. Valnontey) when the risk of avalanche is raised by recent loading. Most avalanches I've seen in one day climbing : 3.

In reply to Paulww:

Carry it climbing or walking. It stays in my bag, and I don't know its there.
Modern shovels pack down and weigh nothing, also like to probe snow sometimes just see how deep its got.
Keep thinking about a transceiver, but don't think they are popular enough yet in this country to validate carrying them.
Hope that changes.
Isn't there an app for your phone yet ?

No I don't because of the following reasons:

Deaths and injury to winter climbers are normally from trauma occurred and not by burial.

If conditions are likely to result in me being buried then I have made some really bad decisions on day of climbing and route and travel decisions. While sadly mistakes are made the vast majority of incidents are through human error.

In reply to DANNYdjb:

Im sure it won't be long before someone pretends to have developed an app. Still pretty wary of use of smart phones in the hills... I think my Iphone got the hot aches yesterday, It took half an hour in the car before it stopped saying "this iPhone needs to cool down before it can operate" ! The last two times I've been out the battery has died because of the cold. I Always now carry a old pay as you go mobile which I would trust far more in an emergency.

In reply to Milesy:

You are spot on, most avalanches and deaths on the mountains are from human error. However what happens if you were to witness an avalanche and you don't have a probe and shovel at the minimum?

Most deaths from avalanches both in the UK and worldwide comes from asphyxiation, by the time MR is called and arrive on scene those buried could be dead. By carrying a probe, shovel and transceiver you could start the rescue immediately and possibly save a life/save some lives.

This is not a criticism of you at all, the UK is only just start to move towards Tranceiver, shovel and probe and is still very small scale but just some food for thought. I believe we will see increased usage of such equipment over the coming years in the UK as well as increased avalanche training and awareness for hill users.

In reply to Paulww:

I tie in to one end of a rope if I am approaching a climb where I think the terrain is questionable, the theory being if I am buried the full length of the rope will not be buried and will lead to me. I would consider a transceiver when climbing on venues like the Ben if I thought other people were carrying them, but since nobody else does there seems to be little point.

In reply to Paulww:


It doesn't seem that long ago I used to carry spare change for a dash to a public phone box in the event of an emergency

In reply to Paulww:

Personnaly i am starting to consider getting the full kit for ski touring mainly, however having carried these items before i would most likely leave them in the bag for walking and climbing as they dont add a lot of weight overall.
I believe glenmore lodge instructors all carry this equipment now and if anything was to happen in the popular cairngorm areas then i reckon they could well be first on the scene . So tranciever could be handy for possible quick rescue if something occured in there vicinity.
My main reason for thinking about one for all my activities is i do a lot of solo stuff skiing/climbing/walking and in a worst case scenario i would be easier to find in a recovery situation and possibly present less risk to any mountain rescue personnel.

In reply to Paulww:
I carry all 3 for touring and climbing, but I live in NZ. Climbers/Mountaineers are over represented in the death from avi numbers here. There has been a big push to make climbers more aware of this: is say it's working as I know a lot more here than would take them.
I'd agree with the person above that it doesn't matter the activity as I'm often crossing the same ground on the approach and walk out.

Could I ask the person above who said climbers are more likely to die from trauma, is there data to back this up? I'd agree that slide for life is more likely on the climbs themselves, but what about the approaches?

I remember someone from SAIS giving a talk saying they wished there was a culture change for winter climbers to carry the kit, and that burials can and do happen in Scotland.

In reply to davy_boy:

Last year Glenmore Lodge issued all pupils on winter courses with probe, shovel and transceiver. I presume they are doing it this season too. Because of this I now carry a probe and shovel of my own.

In reply to RichardP:




Average burial depth is, I believe, 120cm...

In reply to Paulww:

Here's the Association of Canadian Mountain Guides take on the subject, suggesting that the default position is that you should (at least in Canada). Though currently it's pretty rare I'd guess.

http://acc.uberflip.com/i/269626/17

In reply to Paulww:

http://www.mountain-training.org/blog/avalanche-rescue-and-safety-equipment

In reply to Paulww:

TBH I'd save your time investigating kit for now and invest your time in reading this:

http://beaware.sais.gov.uk/

In reply to Paulww:
Just come back from some MRCofS avalanche essentials training that I accessed through my MRT and I have to admit it has opened my eyes to a few things regarding tranceivers.

Firstly- to those who say they don't think it is worth it due to lack of uptake- Glenmore Lodge are issuing them to their students for this season as well as the previous one- its a long term test to see whether it is worthwhile. If you go in to the Northern Corries this winter there is quite a high chance that several people will have them nearby so could initiate a tranceiver search.

Trauma is a major cause of death, but burials can and do happen in Scotland. Bodies have been retrieved from over 3m depth in recent accidents.

Human error is a major cause of avalanches, but we are all human. Being immune to bad decision making (is anyone, absolutely all the time?) will not necessarily protect you. This weekend's avalanche in No 4 gully was said to have been triggered by parties above.

To the person who says they tie in to the rope as a precaution if walking on a suspect slope- the trick is not to get avalanched in the first place.

I'm gently moving towards a new perspective on this, perhaps aided by the fact that I now own a tranceiver having taken up skiing. I will consider the conditions and where I'm going, and make a decision on what gear to take based on that.

In reply to George Ormerod:
I learned to climb in Canada and among members of the BCMC it was de rigeur to carry a transceiver, shovel and probe, even when not requiring a ski approach or descent. I noted the difference when I came back to Scotland, and largely put it down to much more fickle snow conditions and there not being the sheer volume of snow that you can get in Canada ( avalanches wiping out entire towns, for example ).

In reply to Paulww:

Have carried shovel, tranx, and probe along with my partner and practised with these things for last 15 years in Scotland. They weigh nothing compared to all the other crap. The only hassle is the bulk of the shovel. But modern ones are pretty fold-up. As recent years have shown, you might be as cautious as hell out there (and lucky!), but despite all that, somebody else may trigger something that buries you. And yeah, you might not survive anyway due to trauma, but this stuff is cheap and light so well worth having. Then you know that -- alongside the careful wx/snow and route planning -- you have done everything you poss can to reduce the risk of death to you or your partner -- or somebody else you might find out there. Imagine being near the site of some burial event and standing around like a dick simply because you don't have a probe or shovel, or the knowledge/practice? It's like not knowing how to do CPR: many people don't, but that doesn't mean you have to join them.

In reply to Paulww:

I used to carry a shovel when winter climbing and fouind it brilliant for excavating belays. It's simple to even fashion a very comfortable belay seat as well!

In reply to PN82:



Any literature I have read shows most deaths in "Scotland" being trauma the worst factor in avalanches. Maybe I should have been a bit more specific.

http://www.mountainrescuescotland.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Avalanche-...

Out of all recorded avalanches in a 30 year period, only (I use this word carefully) 14% on injuries have resulted in death where as 54% have resulted in injury (and therefor not death by burial or otherwise). So statistically speaking I am more likely to be injured than I am dying (either by burial or through trauma). If 14% have resulted in death - I don't know the figure here of how many of the deaths were through asphyxiation (I will read some more literature when I get home), but even if 100% of all deaths were through asphyxiation then it would still only be 14% of all avalanche incidents where someone was injured.

So on this basis while I do not want to be in an avalanche, if I was in an avalanche then the chance of me being buried is likely less than 14%. The chances of someone else being in an avalanche and being buried while I am also in the vicinity is going to be even less as before I even leave the house I only do so when the forecast and snowpack history is to my satisfaction. I take acceptance that this means I get to climb a lot less than other people who choose to go out in less stable (but not necessarily dangerous) conditions and then make more on-the-ground decisions on the day.


For the majority of winter climbers, stable snow conditions are preferable and route choice, approach and descent decision making is a much more important (and harder to achieve) than having some equipment.

It could even be said that having avalanche gear could in some cases be a heuristic trap either for yourself or others. Someone may take a greater risk on the day knowing they have a transceiver and therefor push on through when they might have otherwise turned back. Like all heuristic traps this can also lead to other people following behind on that basis

-- and I mention this because I have done it, and I am sure you and others have done it as well. Have you ever seen 10 parties going up a gully at various stages, big kicked steps in the snow and then assumed it was safe because well there are people are all stages of the gully and it hasn't avalanched so therefor it must be safe and then followed up - classic heuristic trap! This can apply to avalanche equipment as well and affect other observer's actions.

Scottish terrain isn't like the alps or the greater ranges, and the risk factors and areas are slightly different. On a specific Scottish graded climb you might only have a a pitch of dangerous approach ground which then leads to a long run out, or a cliff / crag. From the avalanches which have occurred in the last few years while some have sadly resulted in burial, the majority have resulted in what is potentially just a very small slab of snow releasing but then putting the victim into a fall over dangerous terrain.

I will also add to that the a major difference in Scottish conditions to maybe the Alps is that stable and unstable snow conditions change much more quickly where as in the Alps unstable snow can and does remain unstable for a full season. If conditions are in the red I am probably unlikely to get out my bed and if I do then I will be doing something on the windward side (cross loading, changing winds and local conditions aside for argument sake).

The point I am making I guess is that if you *choose* to climb in potentially unstable conditions then yeah sure take a transceiver and probe, but it by no stretch replaces the experience of deciding to stay in your bed, or careful approach, route, and descent choices. Many people leave with route fever and are unwilling on some level to choose another objective for the day and maybe because there are people on an adjacent route then assume their route will also "be ok" - again heuristic traps. So don't take my opinion of that avalanche gear is bad, only that it is secondary to other factors and you can be a safe winter climber without having to carry these for the above reasons.

In reply to george mc:

Having thought long and hard about this issue I was going to post a reply but the above says most of what I would have said and more besides.

However, my 2 cents...

To rescue companions or be rescued following burial all of you need to carry all three bits of kit. Just carrying one or 2 of them as some have mentioned doing is pretty much useless for rescuing a buried casualty. It's also worth remembering that if you're all buried you wont be rescuing each other and that needs to be reflected in how you move across the terrain i.e. one at a time not en-masse.

Discussing this issue with reference to 'climbers' lumps together quite a few different approaches and risk factors. A winter mountaineer or grade 1/2 climber in Scotland will spend a large proportion of their day on slopes at the prime angle to avalanche. Someone going to do a steep mixed climb may pass over such slopes on approach or descent but there are often alternatives and the time of exposure is shorter.

Likewise, the comparison with skiers is somewhat spurious. We may be in the same environment but our aims are different and that makes a difference to our decision making in avalanche areas. As a skier I'll actively seek out slopes of 30-45 degrees with soft snow on them. As a climber I'll actively avoid them and not just because of the avalanche risk.

As for the weight thing, I just weighed mine:

BD Super Tour Probe: 320g
BD Deploy Shovel: 575g
BCA Tracker 2 tranceiver: 330g
Total 1.225kg.

Obviously I could make some weight savings but the kit was bought with durability and useability in mind. Everyone needs to come to their own decisions about whether they're willing to shoulder that.

In reply to Snoweider:

I too went on this course a few years ago. Completely changed my views, hence ever since carry a probe and shovel.
i don't think transceivers were available.
so am thinking of going back on the course as a refresher and to learn new info, about things such a the transceiver.

MCOFS do a great job. Its shame BMC aren't as proactive..

In reply to DANNYdjb:

I'd recommend training about avalanches to anyone heading in to the winter hills and it's been useful to me to retrain and update my knowledge every few years. My course was not quite the same as the ones that are more widely available as it was specifically for MRT members, who have different pressures in avalanche terrain. Nevertheless it contained a lot of useful stuff that I will benefit from when I'm enjoying the hills as a punter or at work.

In reply to JohnV:


The polles join together and are the same length as the BD Avalanche probes

In reply to Paulww:

With the rise in popularity of ski touring in places like Coire an t-Sneachda and the gullies on the Ben I think climbers and walkers may unfortunately be in the vacinity of more avalanche instances over the coming years. As mentioned above I too would want to be able to assist if I could and so I think taking the big 3 (probe, shovel, transceiver) is a great idea.

In reply to colin8ll:

The vast majority of Scottish gully descents are made in spring conditions once the snow pack has stabilised.

In reply to Paulww:

I've often carry a shovel in winter anyway:
Improvised Deadman
Snow grave/ hole excavation
Belay excavation
Lunch stop trench.

A shovel is a handy thing to carry in winter

In reply to RichardP:

How long do they take to put together in an emergency in less than ideal conditions and how strong are they relative to a probe?

In reply to BruceM:


This is why I carry probe and shovel. I climb with friends who I care about. The thought of being powerless to help them is awful and given that carrying a proble and shovel is simple it seems silly not to.

Having said that, I haven't bought them transceivers.

In reply to Removed Userfergie:

I am now carrying a very basic plastic snow shovel (a CAMP XLS one , only around 150g) which can also be turned into a deadman anchor with a sling, and useful for glissading or just sitting on. It's also a bit flexible so it fits in a narrow profile climbing backpack without taking much space at all.

In reply to RomTheBear:

It all depends on the route and the terrain I will cross on the way and way back from the climb.

In winter I generally always wear a transceiver and will often pack probe and shovel

In reply to Cuthbert:


If I'm walking the poles are already out.
I remove the handles and join them together with a 6" piece of tube which is in the top pocket of my rucksack
I should imagine it'll take as much time as it does to take out a conventional probe

In reply to DaveHK:

I think you make some really good points here Dave. I wrote a blog post about this issue last year, as the use of this equipment becomes a perennial topic (and perhaps rightly so). I was actually in the process of writing another one the other day when I spotted this thread.

Personally, it's not the default norm for me to head into the Scottish Mountains with this equipment as part of a normal climbing or mountaineering day. Of course "informed choice" is the aim here so here are a few issues...

1. The link with skiing and ski touring in terms of terrain is a spurious one. The aims are very different, and I think to draw parallels between the two doesn't help decision making in avalanche terrain.

2. There is no statistical evidence to suggest that the use of transceiver, shovel, probe will reduce mortality in avalanche incidents in Scotland. The primary cause of death in avalanches in Scotland still isn't really know, despite much anecdotal evidence i.e the ratio between trauma/poly-trauma, asphyxiation, hypothermia. What is emerging is that there is a huge relationship between snow density and survival time. All snow packs are not the same, and the maritime snowpack in Scotland is much wetter and denser. Studies into survival time in Scotland hasn't been done in Scotland as far as I am aware but we can use studies in coastal canada as a proxy. In this case survival time was much shorter than the figures often stated for Europe, and we can speculate it's even less for Scotland. The recent ICAR paper on Avalanche Resuscitation gives a very good summary of the current evidence.

3. The greatest concern is that the use of this equipment draws the focus away from thinking about the terrain and our route choice. e.g. avoiding terrain traps, avoiding "islands of safety" etc.

In reply to RichardP:

Really? I find that hard to believe. It takes about 20 seconds to get the probe out of your sack and deploy it. The deployment bit about 5 seconds I would say.

I am always wary of these two into one types of devices.

In reply to James Thacker:

Just read your blog post. For those that haven't it is superb and sums up all the issues and has links to plenty of data: http://blog.jamesthacker.co.uk/2015/01/the-perennial-question-avalanche-saf...

On the subject of speed of deployment- on the course I just attended we did an exercise where we were asked to hold our breath whilst we removed our rucksacks and deployed probe and shovel. Not easy. The pertinence of this hopefully needs no explaining.

To those who carry one or two items of the "holy trinity" but not all three- I've heard it described as the legs of a stool. For companion rescue, in a burial situation, one is no use without the other two. Probes and shovels do have some alternative uses for people traveling in snowy terrain, but I would question why anyone would want to carry a tranceiver without a probe and shovel.

In reply to Cuthbert:



I was also on an Avalanche awareness course last year and the amount of probes that broke because they were not fit for purpose

In reply to Snoweider:


Quite straightforward - they hope that if they are buried, someone will dig them out, but do not intend to return the favour!

Actually not quite as stark as that, it is quite common practice for guides taking clients off-piste skiing to insist on transceivers (of often a lower tech equivalent), while not expecting them to carry shovels or probes. This is partly "the guide is infallible, nothing will ever happen to him" mindset and partly the fact that clients may have little or no mountain experience and just want to venture off-piste without spending much time learning how to use transceivers or searching. It is also moderately common for solo ski-tourers who regard it is some sort of avalanche precaution without going the whole hog.

In reply to Cuthbert:


Hunting for a victim stumbling over 100m wide and 200m deep avalanche front would take vastly longer than any getting poles out or assembling them possibly could.


A bit like the idea that you can have a combined deadman/shovel. Something that does neither job properly is likely to result.

Last Winter we did a fair bit of shoveling practice, personally I would advise strongly against the "lightweight plastic shovel". The advantage of a good quality metal shovel was huge. Sure plastics tend to be lighter, but if you are carrying one at all, why not carry one that will work when you need it, otherwise why bother.

In reply to RichardP:

Fair enough. I can't see how removing handles, finding a piece of tube and attaching them can be anything like as quick as throwing out the probe and pulling the cable to join it.

I hope you never need to use that system in anger. What make and model is it?

In reply to Simon4:

Why would you be stumbling over a front though? A probe only helps when you have located the person in a relatively small area.

I fully agree re plastic shovels. Metal ones are far superior and easier to use.

In reply to Simon4:

Indeed. I turned up for my course with a decent BD Deploy alu shovel, which is sturdy and has an extendable shaft. It's the industry standard for guides and WMLs, but proved to be pretty inadequate in a rescue dig. I really liked the Ortovox Kodiak which has a big beefy bucket, and an adze shape for dragging snow (very useful in strategic digging with a team of folk shifting spoil) when I gave it a shot.

Probes- the word on the street is that during the Chalamain gap incident the MRT broke several steel probes. I felt a bit embarrased about my lightweight thing.

In reply to Simon4:


Really?


This is partly "the guide is infallible, nothing will ever happen to him" mindset

Really really?

In reply to Cuthbert:


To get to that small area. I have wondered about this. Moving any distance in deep snow without skis takes ages and you can't use skis on avalanche debris. If you need to 50m uphill to dig someone out after an avalanche you either need to stop, put skins on and go up, or struggle/wade up. Then you have to start covering the fresh avalanche debris, then probing etc. All of which would rapidly use up the 15 minutes of so time before anyone buried dies. Good luck....

In reply to Paulww:

This is worth a read if your contemplating buying yourself a shovel. http://www.voile.com/AvalancheVol86_54-60.pdf

I replaced my pishy wee BD effort with a Voile, and find it a useful tool, especially for multi day trips in winter, and don't really notice the minimal extra weight in my back. I tend to pop my probe in the bag as well, just in case, but I'm mindful that the shovel and probe in my rucksack isn't going to be of value in mitigating the effects of my poor decisions on the day - they're only going to help some other poor sod. I have a transceiver, but don't carry it for general hillwalking and climbing in the UK.

In reply to MG:

The point is that you have a transceiver and conduct a course search in the most likely area and not randomly start probing. Of course this doesn't mean moving over the snow will be easy.

The sentence "Hunting for a victim stumbling over 100m wide and 200m deep avalanche front would take vastly longer than any getting poles out or assembling them possibly could." suggests to me that the poster thinks you just hunt for someone using your probe. I may have misread it but certainly hunting over a huge area will be also most pointless without a transceiver.

The modern transceivers are superb but the BCA are significantly behind the Ortovox and Barryvox I think.

In reply to Cuthbert:

I took it to mean the time taken to get a probe ready is probably tiny compared with the likely time to get close to the vicitm. Anyway..

Interested how Ortovox and Barryvox are better than BCA (which I have but may replace)?

In reply to MG:

Faster, better range, much easier to use in multiple burial scenarios and better screen I think. The 3+ and Barryvox are excellent and they detect other transceivers further away than the BCA does. They are also smaller which is nice.

I am not sure that everyone fully understands how transceiver, probe and shovel are used together. I am not an expert though.

In reply to Cuthbert:

Interesting. I know the BCA can do multiple burials but I doubt I would figure out how in reality. Some combination of pressing the small button that you aren't meant to see much.

In reply to MG:

As I understand it, one way they differ is that the BCA has 2 aerials, whereas the latest models from Barryvox and Ortovox have 3, allowing three dimensional receiving (flux lines in the signal, which a tranceiver is searching for, are funny shapes)- which can be helpful at the fine search stage.

Check out this website for everything you wanted to know about tranceivers but were afraid to ask, including detailed reviews of pretty much every model out there. http://beaconreviews.com/transceivers/transceiver_summary.asp

In reply to MG:

You need to practise. We all do but if you don't think you could figure it out you really need to brush up on that.

In reply to Snoweider:

It has three aerials, I think, (Tracker 2) as here

http://beaconreviews.com/transceivers/transceiver_comparison.asp

It seems to me good overall but very much focussed at the basic single search. Realistically I am happy with this. Greater range, and more accurate direction might (or might not) be helpful.

In reply to MG:
Ooops I stand corrected!
Edited, as I was wondering where I was mistaken, its the original BCA tracker (DTS) which is two antennae.

In reply to Cuthbert:

Maybe, or maybe accept multiple burials and a successful search are so unlikely that it is better to focus on being good at one burial search. This is the assumption behind the design of the BCA - make one burial search really simple and intuitive, and make it difficult to accidentally access the more advanced features of the unit.

In reply to MG:

What is helpful is the speed of locating someone and the Ortovox and Barryvox out perform the BCA by having greater range, better processors and most importantly presenting the information they have to you in a way that allows you to move quickly over the ground (as quick as you can that is).

In reply to Cuthbert:

I'll take a look - sounds good.

In reply to James Thacker:


That's the point I am getting at. It is becoming on this thread a heuristic trap. Some of the above commenter (no offense) have nothing on their profile to indicate they have much winter experience but are quite vocal about having had avalanche training and wouldn't not carry the equipment.

While I don't climb in the particularly hard grades - which maybe makes it more relevant for me - as I spend more time on angled snow slopes - I consider myself well experiences in snow travel and route choice and decision making is so much more important. For what is a loaded snow slope in the lee is nice hard neve often in the wind so it is entirely possible to climb and walk with a good travel plan and route plan and never once cross anything except neve and low angled non dangerous snow. Just because I am not trained in how to use a transceiver and probe doesn't mean I don't know how to avoid danger in the first place.

Common sense has to take some precedence over text books.

In reply to Milesy:

I agree with all of the above and arva, shivel and probe should be regarded as a back up to be used as a last resort, not an excuse to venture onto more dangerous slopes/aspects.

This is why they are used more skiing as you can cover ground quickly and soon find yourszelf on a different aspect with different snow.

Having had to find and dig someone out on one occasion, it is a very difficult and tiring thing to do.

In reply to:

It depends on the versions - I assume folk are talking about BCA trackers when they say "BCA"s. The tracker 3 for example has 3 antenna the same as the Pulse and Element and is faster to process signals than units from Mammut.

That said, we do a lot of transceiver drills and really haven't noticed a vast difference in performance between the tracker 1's that we are issued and the Pulses in actual use. Slightly longer range (a few meters normally) and better / more accurate for the fine search, but also more complex and prone to firmware / software errors (2 people of 7 on the av essentials course we were on last year had pulse transceivers which stopped working and needed factory resets while in use). I actually like the simplicity of the trackers.

Where they trackers aren't near as good as the Mammut units is multiple burials. They are poor at that. But BCA have never denied it, their philosophy was that since the vast majority of incidents are single burials, a simple unit with a faster processor (it's not worrying about refreshing graphics, changing screens for different search phases etc) which enables a faster find of a single person was more valuable. Remember as well that the trackers are a lot older than the pulses. a fair comparison would be between the tracker 3 and the pulse, and most reviews of the tracker 3 seem to rate it higher for non-professional users.

Worth a thought that last year when we did the MRS avalanche essential course, non of the instructors were using Mammut units, so I don't read them as being head and shoulders ahead. Advice we got was actually that the pulse was over complex for most users and they would be better off with the element units since very few actually use the "pro" functionality.

The biggest differentiator between those who found the buried dummy quickly and those who didn't was (unsurprisingly) practice......
And this WAS a big difference.
(instructor did a good demo with his old analogue unit he brought for the purpose and was still a lot faster than us!)

Anyway, guess the point I'm making is that in use, we've not found that the device is a big differentiator, but that practice and experience with whatever unit you do use is.

Cheers!

Stu

In reply to MG:

ITs an awful function on the tracker 1 and tracker 2 as it narrows the receiver angle rather than masking the find like the pulse / element units do. It's still useable, but a lot less efficient and really doesn't work for close proximity burials.

It's the yellow (on the tracker 1) and Black (on the tracker 2) buttons.

We generally don't bother trying.

Tracker 3 has a proper masking function though so is a huge improvement!

Cheers,

Stu

In reply to Paulww:

Climbed in Scotland in winter for over 40 years. Don't carry any of that stuff. None of my mates ever have. We take more care now-a-days to try to keep off risky areas. None of us ever avalanched or close to it.. Odd times of close calls have been from rocks from above from other people. Aim in winter to travel as light as possible - for enjoyment. Aim to get out mainly in 'good' as in neve conditions. Can't see me ever carrying any of that stuff on a route in Scotland. If its as bad as to warrant then I'd bin the day or go ski-ing.

In reply to StuDoig:
I've just done same MR course as you. A superb course I thought. I'm rubbish at physics but found the detailed stuff on how tranceivers actually work was very enlightening and explained a lot of idiosyncracies. Instructors on this one rated the Barryvox. I think everyone has their fave. But tbh I think as you say, practice is the key, and I will certainly be doing plenty of that from now on.

In reply to Snoweider:

Aye, it's an excellent course - It'd a great one for the MCofS to learn from and add to their selection I think, even some fairly experience folk on it from us took a lot away from it. Companion rescue for hillwalkers and climbers type of thing.

Yea everyone has their fav devices (so far I've preferred the Pieps units over the rest), but practice far outstrips the exact device so I'm happy enough with my tracker. I've a mate that has been touring since he was bout 2 weeks old or something (French) and he is embarrassingly fast with his analogue unit.

In reply to Cuthbert:


Agreed, also if you are picking up a transceiver signal, it is not clear what you need a probe for - transceivers work at close range as well as distance, obviously probes only at short distances.

It has occurred to me that my party have often practiced transceiver searching, but never experimented with probes, even though we carry them (when ski touring, not when climbing).

In reply to Simon4:

There is an art to probing and a technique to digging, both require practice!

In reply to AdrianC:



It is not that I believe this, but that it is a widely prevalent attitude on the continent, not least because in the case of off-piste or sometimes touring guiding, the clients are skiers who often have little mountain awareness. This of course has the risk that if something DOES happen to the guide (impossible though that is!), the party is very weak.

I seem to recall a tragic case being discussed here where the guide was seriously (as it turned out fatally), injured, where the client only just managed to get herself down, but was unable to help the guide or to tell the MRT where he was with any clarity.

In reply to galpinos:
I will try to practice it next time. But if you do have a transceiver signal, is there much need to probe?

Certainly digging is something that should be practiced, it is very energetic and easy to get into all sorts of messes doing it. I believe that it is best to have a clear digging strategy.

In reply to Cuthbert:


No, I was quite aware that you have virtually no chance of searching a large area without a signal.

In reply to Simon4:

Yep, knowing the depth and acurrate location of the person is the basis for your digging start point.

There's a really good article online somewhere about how to dig (I thought it was a case of just going hell for leather), I'll see if I can find it.

In reply to MG:

Which is why, if at all possible, you start uphill of any burial and sweep across progressively and systematically downwards, in a series of horizontal traverses each about 10 m below the last.

In reply to Simon4:

I don't think you are quite understanding how a transceiver and probe are used together. It's not either/or as you appear to believe* that a probe is not required if you have a transceiver. It is.

* Ref "Agreed, also if you are picking up a transceiver signal, it is not clear what you need a probe for"

In reply to Simon4:

Even so, it's really hard, your whole leg is sinking into the snow/rubble every step and you do end up having to go uphill at some point.

In reply to StuDoig:


We found the range difference between the 2 aerial analogue and 3 aerial digital to be significant, maybe 10 m or more. But the distance to unit indicator is really helpful.



Absolutely, practice, practice, practice every opportunity. It really is different from the books, also for real you will be under a LOT of stress if you think someone is suffocating and you are counting out the 15 minutes.

In reply to galpinos:

What everyone is stressing, entirely correctly, is just how hard this stuff is in practice, how systematic you need to be to have a chance of success and how pressured you will feel in a real situation. This kit is very much a last resort, not at all something you just say "oh, I've got it, now we can do what we want".

In reply to galpinos:



Exactly, and these favorable conditions I seek out. Almost religious checking of weather, wind, sais pit profiles (and history) and making careful decision making before hand, and then on the ground and being flexible to changing destination or route.

I find it very disheartening to hear people say you are being irresponsible for not carrying this equipment with absolutely no idea of your decision making and risk management skills.

And for the record - glenmore lodge is full of highly skilled individuals yet they have never advocated this equipment until now when sadly people on a course got caught out - now I will tread very lightly on this subject for sensitivity reasons but I think it is a point I need to make - why only now after such media coverage have they now decided to implement this policy? Is it partly to do with perception from outside bodies - police - government - media etc. Yes - sure I agree that they would have helped on that day - and again I tread lightly for the sake of hindsight but it seems almost like a knee jerk reaction for what was just a tragic accident.

In reply to Milesy:

Especially, as James Thacker pointed out above, as the density of the snowpack in Scotland is higher than thiose in which survival tests have been carried out, survival times are even shorter. All the more reason to not get caught in the first place.

In reply to galpinos:

I don't think that anyone has advocated rescue kit over avoidance, and few have said they think everyone should be carrying it. Sometimes however even the best get it wrong, or are caught out. The debate is whether that chance justifies carrying the extra kit. For some it will, for others it won't. I don't think either is right or wrong necessarily.

Up until a couple of year ago, I was firmly in the don't bother camp. Now I'm in the "depends on conditions" camp for climbing, but normally do carry when out walking. Not so much because I think I'm likely to be caught (though always possible - I've had 2 near misses triggered by others and I'm pretty sure in the past I've taken more of a risk than I've realised), but that I'd hate not to be able to assist someone who was caught near to me.

re: Glenmore lodge's decision to issue av kit to students there. Not sure that I'd call it kneejerk, but sometimes it takes a major event to change the way people and organisations view risks and the way they operate. An instructed / guided party is different to an independent party of friends, and I can see how carrying av kit could be seens as reducing risk / taking reasonable precautions for the group. If issuing the kit to their parties on the hill adds to the safety margin (or even the safety margin for rescuers) then having a trial of it as they are makes sense. It's no bad thing that it may make folk new to winter walking / mountaineering more aware of the options and get them thinking about how they apply to them.

Cheers!

Stu

A long way down the line I know but I thought that I'd add my tuppence (old money) worth.

I started carrying a shovel & a probe (no transceiver) when "studying" for my Winter ML. I stopped carrying the probe as most of my Winter stuff is solo. I'm a BOF! I worked on the basis that if I get caught in an avalanche then me carrying a probe wasn't a lot of use. I still carry a shovel as it's great for cutting a nice little scoop out of the wind.

Based on the days & times that I go I don't see an awful lot of people on the hill so is a probe worth while? I reckoned not but it might just be selfish.

In reply to Milesy:

Definitely not speaking for the Lodge here, but I've discussed this with one or two people involved with the Lodge decision. Its a trial, to find out whether there are any benefits or drawbacks, to equipping their students with this gear. As I understand it they had been defending their position of no tranceiver/shovel/probe without having tried the alternative. After reflecting on this, they decided to roll out a trial so they actually had some firm ground to base their position on. There is no assumption that it will be continued after the trial, and no pressure on anyone else to follow suit.

Ref transceiver/probe- you need both. There are important and structured stages to a search to maximise the chances of finding a buried cas in minimum time. Lots of info on the BCA site: http://www.backcountryaccess.com/education-research/#rescues

This is a very basic summary. Please don't take my word for it, read the bumf online (written by experts rather than half trained girls on the internet.... ) and read your transceiver instructions. Then if you decide to carry the gear, go practice using it.

Stage 1- you search the debris quickly in a zigzag looking for clues and trying to pick up a beacon signal.
Stage 2: you have a signal and you follow it in until you are within a few metres of the victim.
Stage 3: Fine search- SLOW on your hands and knees, Mark out a box, and then begin strategic probing.
Stage 4: Probe to locate casualty
Stage 5. Strategic digging

Nobody is saying that this is a substitute for good snowcraft, and I don't think anyone has said that it should be compulsory. My own perspective on it is shifting, as I learn more about it, but I'm still going to base my decision on whether to carry it on the conditions of the day, my activity, and the location.

In reply to Paulww:

I'm glad the conversation has swung round to the futility of carrying a probe without a tranceiver (assuming you decide to carry any of it). Without the tranceiver it's needle in a haystack stuff and the chance of finding someone before they suffocate is minimal.

And to the person way up there who said you can't ski across avalanche debris: Unless it's massive blocks from a cornice collapse it's fairly straightforward although you wouldn't do it for fun.

In reply to DaveHK:


That was me. OK it's possible but slow and laborious.

I would be interested to know if anyone has tried a search starting from below avalanche debris in soft snow? How long did it take. If skiing it would be quite possible to be say 30-50m below (or above) a victim. This would be a rather different search typical practices.

In reply to MG:


Being below the victim should only happen if it is the last one in your party that gets caught which is less likely though not impossible. You should actively manage your movement to avoid it. Sounds like a nasty scenario to me as the coarse search could be very slow.

There are good vids on the BCA website about how to do all this.

In reply to MG:

It really isn't. I've never done it in a search (because thankfully I've never done a search) but I've skied across debris plenty of times. It's quite easy and infinitely preferable to being on foot although the fine search is better done on foot.

In reply to MG:

You start from the last time the person was seen and work downslope. The only time I've been involved in a resue we saw it go (different aspect than us) and a guy go under. My mate stayed high, phoned the pisteurs, then directed me to the last known location and I worked down from there. Working up would have been a nightmare.

When I found him he was buried, all bar his nose and mouth, he couldn't actually speak when I got there though.

In reply to galpinos:

But what if it is the last person down with everyone else below?

In reply to Paulww:

I don't always, but disagree with those saying they are not walker / climber equipment.
I ski tour, and winter moutaineer. I have full avalanche kit.
I have once been avalanched, I was in a grade one gully, climbing. There were signs, but I was caught by the heuristic trap of a good avalanche forecast. It was green on all levels at all aspects. I know, and knew at the time, that this does not mean it can't avalanche, but it was a pretty big trap for me. For those saying transceivers would make people less cautious, should we ban the sais for that same reason??! Fortunately, it was not a big avalanche, I managed to stop after 50m, and was not buried or hurt. I was not wearing a transceiver that day.

Last winter, many people went through the cornice on the cas ridge, and I believe there was a guide who went through too. Fortunately, none were buried, but they feasibly could have been. There was no visibility for much of last winter, and mistakes happen, which is why so many people went through I guess. Accidents happen.

In the last big winter for avalanche deaths, I think one might have been a skier, all others were walkers or climbers. Transceivers would certainly not have helped all, but it does increase your chances. I like my chances of surviving my mistakes being increased. The wearing of a transceiver makes me consider avalanche risk more, as the fact I have put it on means I acknowledge that there are risks to be considered. I am pretty risk averse, so will think even more carefully about my route.

In reply to DANNYdjb:

https://www.thebmc.co.uk/bmc-winter-skills-lecture-2014

Ahem

Just to correct someone's assertion above that only the BCA Tracker 3 is a three antennae model. The original tracker has two antennae, but the 2 and 3 both have three antennae. There's next to no difference in practice between the 2 and 3, save for the 3's masking function.

In reply to Cuthbert:

they are the Leki Extreme ski mountaineering poles

In reply to SenzuBean:

MCOFS, are doing this plus discounted training courses.

In reply to DANNYdjb:

But to be fair, these courses are open to BMC members too- MCofS just have access to proper mountains

In reply to girlymonkey:

Of course a grade 1 gully is close to the ideal avalanche angle, easy does NOT mean safe! They are also normally virtually impossible to protect even with a partner.

Some interesting (if a bit heavy going), links about shoveling given by various people, I think I need to practice digging for a buried rucksack (not just a buried transceiver), next time I am ski touring.

There is a point that skiers tend to go out in more dangerous snow conditions, as those are better for skiing but worse for climbing - some of the best skiing snow is the most dangerous, a point never of course reflected in "yo dude" ski videos.

In reply to Snoweider:

are you sure?

http://www.mcofs.org.uk/assets/media/mcofs_booking_conditions_for_mountain_...

In reply to Paulww:

Ok, so I'm out in the mountains on my own, I have the holy trinity with me (Transceiver, shovel and probe). I see someone else swept away by an avalanche, I don't know them, I don't know whether or not their wearing a transceiver. What do I do?
If I start a transceiver search and their not wearing one I'd be wasting my time. If they were wearing one and I don't do a transceiver search - thinking they wouldn't have one - I'd never find them in time.
Or it could be the other way around, I'd be the one swept away and someone else see's it, how do they know whether I wearing the kit or not?

In reply to OwenM:
Sigal search with the transceiver is fast- done at a jog, waving it about next to your ear while you search the debris for clues and signs on the surface. Adds no extra time to what you should do anyway.

On subject of MCofS courses and BMC members- looks like I'm wrong there, though I must say I'm surprised as they seem to be reciprocal in all else.

In reply to Paulww:

My transceiver is an barryvox element no need to hold it to your ear, it's loud enough to hear over any cairngorm gale.

In reply to Paulww:

Thankyou for the generally positive response on this topic. It certainly appears that there is enough people with the equipment in the Scottish hills to warrant carrying it, especially as I already have it. I can also understand the reasons for not doing so, I do think there is little benefit in carrying one or two out of the three though (Transceiver, probe, shovel).

Of course the important part is knowing how to use the equipment, I've done several practice searches with both probe and transceiver but certainly going to consider one of the courses mentioned above. Also more importantly is improving understanding of conditions and terrain management and avoiding avalanches all together. I'm currently reading Bruce Tempers Book "Staying Alive In Avalanche Terrain" which is a useful read for anyone heading into the hills in winter.

Generally I am of the opinion that I would take it out regardless of conditions, mainly because conditions are often not as expected and can plans/intentions can also change during a day.

Interesting point on the fact that carrying the kit changes the perception of risk. I don't think having the kit would change my assessment of the situation. It's a little bit like having a first aid kit.. just because you have one you still try to avoid accidents.

In reply to Paulww:


" I don't think having the kit would change my assessment of the situation. "

That is precisely the problem! You don't *think* it would but it would.

Nobody thinks that their own judgement is affected by any kind of clouding but the studies show otherwise. Our decision making is constantly affected by a whole range of subconscious factors we're unaware of. None of us is the rational creature we tell ourselves we are.

I hope that doesn't sound like some pointed rant at you personally. Sorry if it does - it isn't meant to be! But this is a really important point. Risk homeostasis, heuristics, group dynamics and more all conspire to screw up our decisions and they don't tell us they're doing it.

If you want to read more on this subject then an excellent book on the difference between how we think we make decisions and how we actually make them is David McRaney's "You Are Not So Smart." There's also a very interesting paper about avalanche education called "Sex, drugs & the white death" which you'll find a pdf copy of with a short search.

In reply to AdrianC:

Good point well made. Thanks for the references I'll look them up.