This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
How useful would it be for winter mountaineers to start using the "Recco" reflector system, the system can detect about 200m through air and 30m through snow? Would it be possible to attach one to a drone perhaps? Maybe Recco are working on this? Perhaps someone from our great MR teams could advise and give us their opnion?
In reply to paulh.0776:
The equipment needed to search for the reflector is what makes it impractical. Unwieldy and expensive, and how quickly can it be deployed to an incident? Self rescue by witnesses is what saves lives in avalanches, hence the widespread use of 'bleepers' in alpine countries.
The equipment needed to search for the reflector is what makes it impractical. Unwieldy and expensive, and how quickly can it be deployed to an incident? Self rescue by witnesses is what saves lives in avalanches, hence the widespread use of 'bleepers' in alpine countries.
4
In reply to paulh.0776:
I was flicking through Eric Langmuir's book the other day, the winter section, where he makes a big deal about how a companion is a mountaineer's only realistic chance of rescue from an avalanche, as by the time MRT arrives they will probably be dead. If I remember the figures correctly, I think survival rates drop off after about 30 mins of burial.
As I understand it, Recco is for ski resorts where people aren't going out to be independent? If you're in the mountains, an avalanche tranceiver is what you really want on you?
I was flicking through Eric Langmuir's book the other day, the winter section, where he makes a big deal about how a companion is a mountaineer's only realistic chance of rescue from an avalanche, as by the time MRT arrives they will probably be dead. If I remember the figures correctly, I think survival rates drop off after about 30 mins of burial.
As I understand it, Recco is for ski resorts where people aren't going out to be independent? If you're in the mountains, an avalanche tranceiver is what you really want on you?
5
In reply to Tom the tall:
This. RECCO systems are just impracticable. Seeing as it's a matter of minutes if you want a chance of saving someone, using a system that involves having to call for a rescue and wait for them to arrive is not particularly useful.
This. RECCO systems are just impracticable. Seeing as it's a matter of minutes if you want a chance of saving someone, using a system that involves having to call for a rescue and wait for them to arrive is not particularly useful.
In reply to paulh.0776:
I was thinking about this yesterday after reading about the on-going search on the Ben. I've got a few bits of snowboarding kit with reflectors sewn in and it strikes me as odd why they're not more common. Of course they're not going to be as effective as a properly used transceiver system, but for what they weigh and the fact they don't need any attention (charging etc.) they seem ideal for mountaineering, even if it doesn't really provide any immediate response assistance.
Edit: I suppose one of the main benefits in using the system would use would be the decreased exposure of MRT/search & rescue teams to dangerous environments.
I was thinking about this yesterday after reading about the on-going search on the Ben. I've got a few bits of snowboarding kit with reflectors sewn in and it strikes me as odd why they're not more common. Of course they're not going to be as effective as a properly used transceiver system, but for what they weigh and the fact they don't need any attention (charging etc.) they seem ideal for mountaineering, even if it doesn't really provide any immediate response assistance.
Edit: I suppose one of the main benefits in using the system would use would be the decreased exposure of MRT/search & rescue teams to dangerous environments.
Post edited at 11:49
1
In reply to climbwhenready:
They may not be much use for wilderness avalanche rescue but a highly recognizable radio reflector like that could still prove vitally useful in remotely detecting and locating people lost in foul weather where the RF spectrum is your only real hope of 'seeing'.
I'd never heard of them before, I wonder how widespread they are in outdoor clothing/equipment?
jk
> As I understand it, Recco is for ski resorts where people aren't going out to be independent? If you're in the mountains, an avalanche tranceiver is what you really want on you?
They may not be much use for wilderness avalanche rescue but a highly recognizable radio reflector like that could still prove vitally useful in remotely detecting and locating people lost in foul weather where the RF spectrum is your only real hope of 'seeing'.
I'd never heard of them before, I wonder how widespread they are in outdoor clothing/equipment?
jk
In reply to jkarran:
Unfortunately not very.
But quite a few of the skiing clothing manufacturers are now adding Recco's on their apparel. And you can also buy the reflectors to be glued to your skiboot, at least that was possible in the past.
Generally speakin' a Recco is body recovery tool, but indeed in difficult terrain & visibility it could also be used to aid searching for those lost.
From what I remember, the "searching" tool is quite big. So not that useful for long approaches. But the helo-mounted thing might be rather good (like in the case of Rachel and Tim).
> I'd never heard of them before, I wonder how widespread they are in outdoor clothing/equipment?
Unfortunately not very.
But quite a few of the skiing clothing manufacturers are now adding Recco's on their apparel. And you can also buy the reflectors to be glued to your skiboot, at least that was possible in the past.
Generally speakin' a Recco is body recovery tool, but indeed in difficult terrain & visibility it could also be used to aid searching for those lost.
From what I remember, the "searching" tool is quite big. So not that useful for long approaches. But the helo-mounted thing might be rather good (like in the case of Rachel and Tim).
In reply to HeMa:
At 900MHz/1.8GHz I don't see why the antennae (the bulk of the detector) need be impractically large. It's certainly in the size range a small UAV could carry, potentially into weather too risky for manned flight. We also carry various other bits of electronic equipment (phones, GPS receiver) that are detectable in the same part of the RF spectrum, potentially with the same antenna. Of course there are legal issues with operating UAVs in the UK at the moment but I suspect that'll change in the coming decade, quite likely starting with SAR and surveying.
jk
At 900MHz/1.8GHz I don't see why the antennae (the bulk of the detector) need be impractically large. It's certainly in the size range a small UAV could carry, potentially into weather too risky for manned flight. We also carry various other bits of electronic equipment (phones, GPS receiver) that are detectable in the same part of the RF spectrum, potentially with the same antenna. Of course there are legal issues with operating UAVs in the UK at the moment but I suspect that'll change in the coming decade, quite likely starting with SAR and surveying.
jk
In reply to jkarran:
Hand held RECCO is for fine search, its about the size of a book:
http://www.recco.com/the-recco-system
Much the same distances as a Transceiver, the helicopter ones will up the power significantly I would suspect, also pretty useless unless the weather is good.
Hand held RECCO is for fine search, its about the size of a book:
http://www.recco.com/the-recco-system
Much the same distances as a Transceiver, the helicopter ones will up the power significantly I would suspect, also pretty useless unless the weather is good.
In reply to Dark-Cloud:
Why useless unless the weather is good, do you mean if the weather is too risky to fly?
jk
> Much the same distances as a Transceiver, the helicopter ones will up the power significantly I would suspect, also pretty useless unless the weather is good.
Why useless unless the weather is good, do you mean if the weather is too risky to fly?
jk
In reply to jkarran:
Not risky ? If they can't see they don't fly, you can't fly a helicopter or UAV in terrain with bad weather, they won't even get airborne and if they did they would need to be within 5 mins flying time to the location to be any real help recovering you alive.
It's just not practical to use RECCO unless the resort is 100% setup for it, as above, a partner/witness and/or transceiver are your primary help.
Not risky ? If they can't see they don't fly, you can't fly a helicopter or UAV in terrain with bad weather, they won't even get airborne and if they did they would need to be within 5 mins flying time to the location to be any real help recovering you alive.
It's just not practical to use RECCO unless the resort is 100% setup for it, as above, a partner/witness and/or transceiver are your primary help.
Post edited at 12:58
2
In reply to paulh.0776:
A slight off topic but as others have said...
Ski touring types should always carry a beacon, probe and shovel when out, regardless of avalanche danger or conditions. As it is never known when you need to help yourself or others.
I see no reason why climbers should feel exempt from this! The gear is light enough and just as life saving as any rope or piece of protection. In fact it could be considered poor practice and stupid not to!
SAR is more of a body recovery service with regards to avalanche victims.
A slight off topic but as others have said...
Ski touring types should always carry a beacon, probe and shovel when out, regardless of avalanche danger or conditions. As it is never known when you need to help yourself or others.
I see no reason why climbers should feel exempt from this! The gear is light enough and just as life saving as any rope or piece of protection. In fact it could be considered poor practice and stupid not to!
SAR is more of a body recovery service with regards to avalanche victims.
1
In reply to Dark-Cloud:
I don't see why not from a practical perspective at least, the problem is more legal than technical. You can afford to risk a £200 robot flying a task in all but the most extreme weather and they can navigate non-visually through known/mapped terrain.
jk
> Exactly, no risk about it, if they can't see they don't fly, you cant fly a helicopter or UAV in terrain with bad weather, full stop.
I don't see why not from a practical perspective at least, the problem is more legal than technical. You can afford to risk a £200 robot flying a task in all but the most extreme weather and they can navigate non-visually through known/mapped terrain.
jk
In reply to jkarran:
And there you have hit the nail on the head.....known terrain ? How exactly do you prepare a drone for that, load it with a 3D image of the entire mountain range which it might be operating in ?
I don't think legality would have anything to do with it in a rescue situation.
> ......... they can navigate non-visually through known/mapped terrain.
> jk
And there you have hit the nail on the head.....known terrain ? How exactly do you prepare a drone for that, load it with a 3D image of the entire mountain range which it might be operating in ?
I don't think legality would have anything to do with it in a rescue situation.
In reply to Dark-Cloud:
The land surface of earth is pretty well mapped and that data is freely available. You don't need to load the entire map (though there's no reason why you couldn't for a known area of operation), you just need a safe flight plan between waypoints generated using a map. In this role you're also flying a radar who's returns can potentially be unpicked to give a crude terrain picture.
jk
The land surface of earth is pretty well mapped and that data is freely available. You don't need to load the entire map (though there's no reason why you couldn't for a known area of operation), you just need a safe flight plan between waypoints generated using a map. In this role you're also flying a radar who's returns can potentially be unpicked to give a crude terrain picture.
jk
In reply to paulh.0776:
First of all, forget all this drone stuff for now. Their time will come, and things are developing quite quickly, but demonstrating a capability and making it a useful rescue technique are two different stages. Get back to me in 2020.
As I think most are aware, the Recco is largely a resort device used by organised rescuers and the transceiver is the same PLUS immediate aid by companion rescuers. Few MRT in the UK will look for hill users with Recco. This is a reflection (!) of the fact that there is limited use of Recco by that population and in the kit they buy. Yes: chicken - egg.
Transceivers on 'search' can pick up other types of signal but only very weakly. They are quite discrete in their sensing and you will get limited signal/interference from other sources. Newer designs try to tell you more detail but as with most new tech there is a danger of too much complication.
Recco sends a radar signal out and a Recco reflector will send a particular type of signal back. Again quite discrete detection. Just as a team needs to keep transceivers still on 'send' out of the search area, the Recco operator needs to 'clean' themselves and the operating area of items that might produce a distracting signal.
In this area of specialism, Dale Atkins is an important contributor. Dale is a Recco guy. Here is a video from Dale Atkins about using BOTH.
youtube.com/watch?v=O9jIw9RxAR8&
First of all, forget all this drone stuff for now. Their time will come, and things are developing quite quickly, but demonstrating a capability and making it a useful rescue technique are two different stages. Get back to me in 2020.
As I think most are aware, the Recco is largely a resort device used by organised rescuers and the transceiver is the same PLUS immediate aid by companion rescuers. Few MRT in the UK will look for hill users with Recco. This is a reflection (!) of the fact that there is limited use of Recco by that population and in the kit they buy. Yes: chicken - egg.
Transceivers on 'search' can pick up other types of signal but only very weakly. They are quite discrete in their sensing and you will get limited signal/interference from other sources. Newer designs try to tell you more detail but as with most new tech there is a danger of too much complication.
Recco sends a radar signal out and a Recco reflector will send a particular type of signal back. Again quite discrete detection. Just as a team needs to keep transceivers still on 'send' out of the search area, the Recco operator needs to 'clean' themselves and the operating area of items that might produce a distracting signal.
In this area of specialism, Dale Atkins is an important contributor. Dale is a Recco guy. Here is a video from Dale Atkins about using BOTH.
youtube.com/watch?v=O9jIw9RxAR8&
2
In reply to Jim Fraser:
What's interesting to me is how we're increasingly becoming visible in the RF spectrum due to the gadgets we carry and the implications that has for SAR. How a detector is deployed doesn't really matter and you're right, widespread use of autonomous UAVs is some time off but they do offer the possibility of searching while weather, surface conditions or manpower limitations restrict human operations.
jk
What's interesting to me is how we're increasingly becoming visible in the RF spectrum due to the gadgets we carry and the implications that has for SAR. How a detector is deployed doesn't really matter and you're right, widespread use of autonomous UAVs is some time off but they do offer the possibility of searching while weather, surface conditions or manpower limitations restrict human operations.
jk
In reply to jkarran:
Not that simple.
When MRT stop going out, it has already got too windy for a 4000shp helicopter, it's outside the design operating temperature range for standard low cost electronic devices (the only things still running are avalanche transceivers and old Nokias) and battery performance is a fraction of the normal spec.
> ... the possibility of searching while weather, surface conditions or manpower limitations restrict human operations.
Not that simple.
When MRT stop going out, it has already got too windy for a 4000shp helicopter, it's outside the design operating temperature range for standard low cost electronic devices (the only things still running are avalanche transceivers and old Nokias) and battery performance is a fraction of the normal spec.
In reply to HeMa:
I am a trainer for Recco and a bit reluctant to post on here given the negative comments. Just go the Recco web site and you will see that Recco is a standard avalanche search tool http://www.recco.com/resorts-operations/european-resorts and the international rescue commission promote being searchable with Recco reflectors http://www.alpine-rescue.org/ikar-cisa/documents/2015/ikar20150220001473.pd... and it is in hundreds of locations. The R9 detector is the size of a hard back book. Folk in the UK are not well informed about avalanche recovery success from Recco or even dogs for that matter unless they look for the data. Two skiers were dug out alive last week one of whom was 1.5m deep found by Recco. Yes it can be deloyed more quickly in a ski area but who's to say that it might not have a place in MR. Bear in mind Robert Burnett survived for 27 hours. Many Scottish MR teams have Recco detectors and only yesterday the ski patrol at Glencoe Mountain deployed their Recco at an avalanche to verify (after a beacon search and talking to witness) that no one was buried. Due to no deflection its good from the air and is very easy to work from an EH 135/145 as used by the PHGM or REGA et al, but as no one has tested it or shown an interest from the current SAR provider I don't know how it would be in a bigger helo. I do however have all the linkages here to make it work. Its just another search tool but current thinking is a little bit like team sky and cycling in that incremental positive search tools when combined increase success. The extra folk being found don't mind. As mountaineers do not have a beacon shovel probe culture then maybe carrying a couple of reflectors might just be better than the other option which is not being searchable/not being found in an avalanche and even if folk are sceptical about it being deployed timely enough up the survival probability it at least might decrease time exposure and secondary risk to rescuers. Having said that it will pick at close range the harmonic from a mobile phone. Reflectors cost £20 each and its recommended folk have two (front left/back right or vice versa) so one is always at a favourable orientation. I would not like to speculate that it would be relevant to the current ongoing searches for missing mountaineers as the geographic areas are so big. http://crankitupgear.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/recco-thoughts.html
I am a trainer for Recco and a bit reluctant to post on here given the negative comments. Just go the Recco web site and you will see that Recco is a standard avalanche search tool http://www.recco.com/resorts-operations/european-resorts and the international rescue commission promote being searchable with Recco reflectors http://www.alpine-rescue.org/ikar-cisa/documents/2015/ikar20150220001473.pd... and it is in hundreds of locations. The R9 detector is the size of a hard back book. Folk in the UK are not well informed about avalanche recovery success from Recco or even dogs for that matter unless they look for the data. Two skiers were dug out alive last week one of whom was 1.5m deep found by Recco. Yes it can be deloyed more quickly in a ski area but who's to say that it might not have a place in MR. Bear in mind Robert Burnett survived for 27 hours. Many Scottish MR teams have Recco detectors and only yesterday the ski patrol at Glencoe Mountain deployed their Recco at an avalanche to verify (after a beacon search and talking to witness) that no one was buried. Due to no deflection its good from the air and is very easy to work from an EH 135/145 as used by the PHGM or REGA et al, but as no one has tested it or shown an interest from the current SAR provider I don't know how it would be in a bigger helo. I do however have all the linkages here to make it work. Its just another search tool but current thinking is a little bit like team sky and cycling in that incremental positive search tools when combined increase success. The extra folk being found don't mind. As mountaineers do not have a beacon shovel probe culture then maybe carrying a couple of reflectors might just be better than the other option which is not being searchable/not being found in an avalanche and even if folk are sceptical about it being deployed timely enough up the survival probability it at least might decrease time exposure and secondary risk to rescuers. Having said that it will pick at close range the harmonic from a mobile phone. Reflectors cost £20 each and its recommended folk have two (front left/back right or vice versa) so one is always at a favourable orientation. I would not like to speculate that it would be relevant to the current ongoing searches for missing mountaineers as the geographic areas are so big. http://crankitupgear.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/recco-thoughts.html
7
In reply to Jim Fraser:
Oh come on, don't be silly. Helicopters are compromised to carry people and operations limited to do so safely in a way that small, disposably cheap UAVs simply don't need to be. Light weight has benefits, huge thrust to weight ratios and structures that will withstand tens of g are achievable with modest equipment/materials if it's kept small and light*. Regulating battery and circuit temperature is not a difficult problem to solve, there's plenty of cooling air and waste heat to go around, much of it developed in the battery. Electrical power makes less sense as flight times are extended anyway as the energy density isn't great and the 'fuel' weight is with you right through the flight. If you lash something together from cheap off the shelf bits with the battery hanging out the bottom in the airflow you're right, it's not going to perform properly and your electronics/oscillators are going to drift leading to problems but these aren't insurmountable challenges. I'll grant you hail may very well be!
*for example: a small composite glider turning 50g, 500mph laps in mountain rotor youtube.com/watch?v=hFPJ6DUAY10&
Anyway, I'm not normally one to jump on the 'drones are the answer' band wagon but once you get past the trendy multi-copters and their go-pro cargo there are some very interesting possibilities opening up as the various technologies mature and legal frameworks for their deployment evolve.
jk
> When MRT stop going out, it has already got too windy for a 4000shp helicopter, it's outside the design operating temperature range for standard low cost electronic devices (the only things still running are avalanche transceivers and old Nokias) and battery performance is a fraction of the normal spec.
Oh come on, don't be silly. Helicopters are compromised to carry people and operations limited to do so safely in a way that small, disposably cheap UAVs simply don't need to be. Light weight has benefits, huge thrust to weight ratios and structures that will withstand tens of g are achievable with modest equipment/materials if it's kept small and light*. Regulating battery and circuit temperature is not a difficult problem to solve, there's plenty of cooling air and waste heat to go around, much of it developed in the battery. Electrical power makes less sense as flight times are extended anyway as the energy density isn't great and the 'fuel' weight is with you right through the flight. If you lash something together from cheap off the shelf bits with the battery hanging out the bottom in the airflow you're right, it's not going to perform properly and your electronics/oscillators are going to drift leading to problems but these aren't insurmountable challenges. I'll grant you hail may very well be!
*for example: a small composite glider turning 50g, 500mph laps in mountain rotor youtube.com/watch?v=hFPJ6DUAY10&
Anyway, I'm not normally one to jump on the 'drones are the answer' band wagon but once you get past the trendy multi-copters and their go-pro cargo there are some very interesting possibilities opening up as the various technologies mature and legal frameworks for their deployment evolve.
jk
Post edited at 16:52
2
In reply to jkarran:
I'm pretty sure Lochaber MRT have mentioned using a drone before so it shouldn't be that hard to have a record detector on it. No idea how Recco detectors work though, I was under the impression it was a body recovery tool but Young Fox obviously believes it has potentially a bigger role to play.
I'm pretty sure Lochaber MRT have mentioned using a drone before so it shouldn't be that hard to have a record detector on it. No idea how Recco detectors work though, I was under the impression it was a body recovery tool but Young Fox obviously believes it has potentially a bigger role to play.
In reply to jkarran:
How's a drone going to cope with being buffeted by the wind and how will the rotor blades withstand icing up? (Or the body of the device itself)
As for UK climbers carrying recco/ transceivers the argument against was that most UK Avalanche victims aren't buried but suffer injuries from being caught in the Avalanche. That said, I have carried shovel, probe, ARVA in Scotland when ski touring.
It all comes down to judgement.
How's a drone going to cope with being buffeted by the wind and how will the rotor blades withstand icing up? (Or the body of the device itself)
As for UK climbers carrying recco/ transceivers the argument against was that most UK Avalanche victims aren't buried but suffer injuries from being caught in the Avalanche. That said, I have carried shovel, probe, ARVA in Scotland when ski touring.
It all comes down to judgement.
In reply to Tim Davies:
I'm not saying it's a trivial problem but the technology exists to fly small UAVs in rough mountain air. One solution to extreme buffeting would be to just ride it out doing the bare minimum required to stay clear of terrain rather than wasting power fighting it. Then again, these things aren't toys, with the right control they can handle pretty extreme turbulence. See youtube.com/watch?v=l5FqYiZb_5s& for an example of the acceleration they're capable of. The best approach would be one that avoided the worst of it at the task planning stage if possible. Who knows, in certain conditions icing may be insurmountable but I don't see why existing anti icing strategies would fail, low adhesion surface coatings, heating critical surfaces and pneumatic surface deformation. These are engineering problems that will have solutions even if that solution is picking and choosing conditions for deployment or accepting losses.
I'm thinking more of the missing person scenario than the avalanche one where covering a lot of ground quickly looking for electronic signals could be a big time saver if not in some cases a life saver. I just picked up on the thread because I liked the neat harmonic radar solution employed by Recco to reducing clutter reflections and the simplicity of the (potentially very low cost) reflector. I guess it's maybe still under patent but this is the sort of thing that could be distributed in key-rings/pens/whistle-strings/map-cases for pence each.
jk
> How's a drone going to cope with being buffeted by the wind and how will the rotor blades withstand icing up? (Or the body of the device itself)
I'm not saying it's a trivial problem but the technology exists to fly small UAVs in rough mountain air. One solution to extreme buffeting would be to just ride it out doing the bare minimum required to stay clear of terrain rather than wasting power fighting it. Then again, these things aren't toys, with the right control they can handle pretty extreme turbulence. See youtube.com/watch?v=l5FqYiZb_5s& for an example of the acceleration they're capable of. The best approach would be one that avoided the worst of it at the task planning stage if possible. Who knows, in certain conditions icing may be insurmountable but I don't see why existing anti icing strategies would fail, low adhesion surface coatings, heating critical surfaces and pneumatic surface deformation. These are engineering problems that will have solutions even if that solution is picking and choosing conditions for deployment or accepting losses.
> As for UK climbers carrying recco/ transceivers...
I'm thinking more of the missing person scenario than the avalanche one where covering a lot of ground quickly looking for electronic signals could be a big time saver if not in some cases a life saver. I just picked up on the thread because I liked the neat harmonic radar solution employed by Recco to reducing clutter reflections and the simplicity of the (potentially very low cost) reflector. I guess it's maybe still under patent but this is the sort of thing that could be distributed in key-rings/pens/whistle-strings/map-cases for pence each.
jk
1
In reply to GarethSL:
^ This! As a skiier-type I always have avi kit with me. It amazes me, especially as climbers tend to be more exposed for longer to avi risk (bottom of gullies, traversing faces, feet not as fast as skis etc etc) that there isn't the beacon / shovel / probe culture.
> Ski touring types should always carry a beacon, probe and shovel when out, regardless of avalanche danger or conditions. As it is never known when you need to help yourself or others.
> I see no reason why climbers should feel exempt from this! The gear is light enough and just as life saving as any rope or piece of protection. In fact it could be considered poor practice and stupid not to!
^ This! As a skiier-type I always have avi kit with me. It amazes me, especially as climbers tend to be more exposed for longer to avi risk (bottom of gullies, traversing faces, feet not as fast as skis etc etc) that there isn't the beacon / shovel / probe culture.
2
In reply to paulh.0776:
Fear of extra weight - double up use then - drill holes in you shovel blade and use it as a deadman.
Given the trivial issues in adding Recco reflectors (weight ?) I really don't see any issue in having them on mountaineering clothes There's no downside
Fear of extra weight - double up use then - drill holes in you shovel blade and use it as a deadman.
Given the trivial issues in adding Recco reflectors (weight ?) I really don't see any issue in having them on mountaineering clothes There's no downside
In reply to Young Fox:
So they are sold again. I do remember that a few years back (so perhaps 10), they were not sold because people placed the sticker-reflectors on their skis. That was also the time, that the Recco receivers were quite bulky. Nice to hear that things have evolved.
And anything is better than nothing.
That said, due to my background in skiing... I still consider Recco a body recovery tool. And do my best to avoid even getting into an avalanche, and if the shite hits the fan have a beacon, probe & showel plus friends that have the same equipment and also know how to use 'em.
That said, the topic at hand is climbers... And to be rather honest, climbers are often quite clueless about avalanches (at least when compared to seasoned skiers). Also climbers do not prepare for avalanches (beacon, probe & shovel). And for that reason, I'm pro Recco... Or any other tool, that will help SAR to locate climbers and hikers (for whatever reason). A good example would be the current Ben situation.
> I am a trainer for Recco .... Reflectors cost £20 each and its recommended folk have two (front left/back right or vice versa) so one is always at a favourable orientation.
So they are sold again. I do remember that a few years back (so perhaps 10), they were not sold because people placed the sticker-reflectors on their skis. That was also the time, that the Recco receivers were quite bulky. Nice to hear that things have evolved.
And anything is better than nothing.
That said, due to my background in skiing... I still consider Recco a body recovery tool. And do my best to avoid even getting into an avalanche, and if the shite hits the fan have a beacon, probe & showel plus friends that have the same equipment and also know how to use 'em.
That said, the topic at hand is climbers... And to be rather honest, climbers are often quite clueless about avalanches (at least when compared to seasoned skiers). Also climbers do not prepare for avalanches (beacon, probe & shovel). And for that reason, I'm pro Recco... Or any other tool, that will help SAR to locate climbers and hikers (for whatever reason). A good example would be the current Ben situation.
1
In reply to HeMa:
Quite agree that education and pro active approach is better than re active and the best reactive is companion rescue. Skiers as you say are more clued up to this as well as consequence reduction with airbags. Recco is just another backup insurance but it's effective as the survival stats from Recco finds show. Best practice as per the other alpine nations as per ICAR recommendations as UK mountain rescue is a member is important and to its credit UK teams be it MR or ski follow them and Recco search is a part. I am not sure the "being searchable" message which is primarily aimed at ski tourers and off piste skiers who make up the largest slice of Avalanche fatalities will ever have an appeal to UK mountaineers but as backcountry skiing continues to grow its a credit that MR is ahead of the game. As an aside there is a lot of misinformation on trauma vs asphyxia and/or hypothermia in the UK as its all anecdote unlike continental stats and also a general ignorance of survival and recovery success and failure. My analogy would be that Recco is like out of hospital defibrillation in cardiac arrest. Most casualties will be dead by the time an MRT arrives and most teams will never fire one in anger however they all have one and in among that there will be a grateful survivor that's beaten the odds. I think most teams have defibs and wouldn't suggest all have Recco so it's a crude analogy. It would seem remiss not to deploy a recognised search tool. I should also mention that a good search dog is also vital. Basically anything is better than poking holes with probes at the bottom end of the survival curve.
Quite agree that education and pro active approach is better than re active and the best reactive is companion rescue. Skiers as you say are more clued up to this as well as consequence reduction with airbags. Recco is just another backup insurance but it's effective as the survival stats from Recco finds show. Best practice as per the other alpine nations as per ICAR recommendations as UK mountain rescue is a member is important and to its credit UK teams be it MR or ski follow them and Recco search is a part. I am not sure the "being searchable" message which is primarily aimed at ski tourers and off piste skiers who make up the largest slice of Avalanche fatalities will ever have an appeal to UK mountaineers but as backcountry skiing continues to grow its a credit that MR is ahead of the game. As an aside there is a lot of misinformation on trauma vs asphyxia and/or hypothermia in the UK as its all anecdote unlike continental stats and also a general ignorance of survival and recovery success and failure. My analogy would be that Recco is like out of hospital defibrillation in cardiac arrest. Most casualties will be dead by the time an MRT arrives and most teams will never fire one in anger however they all have one and in among that there will be a grateful survivor that's beaten the odds. I think most teams have defibs and wouldn't suggest all have Recco so it's a crude analogy. It would seem remiss not to deploy a recognised search tool. I should also mention that a good search dog is also vital. Basically anything is better than poking holes with probes at the bottom end of the survival curve.
Post edited at 21:43
3
In reply to paulh.0776:
Just to be clear, Recco does work and some Scottish MR teams do have them.
ACCIDENT REPORTS
Live rescue of avalanche victim with RECCO in Les Crosets (Les Portes du Soleil), Switzerland, February 13, 2016
Report by Francis Perrin, rescue manager in Champéry-Les Crosets
Saturday at around 1 p.m. a couple and their two children were skiing off piste in one of the gullies that go down to the resort when an avalanche, 40 m wide, 30 m long and 1 m deep buried the woman. Her husband immediately called the 144 central (Swiss national emergency number), which transferred the call to the ski patrol in Champéry, who quickly identified the position.
Two rescuers quickly drove to the area on a snowmobile and then skied the last part to the site. They immediately started a transceiver and RECCO search, along with spot probing at the same time.
After approximately 3 minutes of searching and around 40 m below their starting-point, one of the rescuers received a signal with the RECCO detector on maximum power. One minute later, after lowering the RECCO power 2 levels, the victim was pinpointed and confirmed with a probe.
In the meantime, a third rescuer had arrived and could help his colleagues dig and quickly uncovered the buried woman's head at a depth of approximately 80 cm. She was then dug out completely, safe and sound after 20-25 minutes of burial.
After confirmation that no more victims were buried, the additional resources including an avalanche dog from Avoriaz that was being brought by a MBH helicopter, as well as further helicopters from Air-Glaciers were cancelled.
The victim was able to ski down to the doctor’s office, where a doctor evaluated her and confirmed that she was physically OK. She then returned home to Champéry with her family.
The avalanche danger was rated considerable (4). None of the 4 skiers were equipped with avalanche transceivers.
Live rescue with RECCO detector in Sedrun, Switzerland, January 15, 2016
Report by Toni Cathomas, technical director Andermatt-Sedrun
On Friday afternoon, at 13h31, the rescue team received a call about an avalanche with two buried victims. The first rescuers arrived to the site 9 minutes later and in the meantime, one of the victims had been able to get out of the snow and help the second victim who was buried but visible.
It was then confirmed that a third person was still buried under the snow, so the rescuers called for more help from REGA and for a RECCO detector to be brought. The 3 rescuers started to search the avalanche with probes without success.
A fourth rescuer arrived at 14h10 bringing a RECCO detector and shortly afterwards he received a signal. The rescuers were able to dig out the unconscious avalanche victim before the arrival of the REGA helicopter. At 14h30, the REGA doctor arrived and treated the patient who was brought to hospital. The victim survived.
The size of the avalanche was 100 x 10 m, burial depth 1 m, total burial time 45 minutes. Snow conditions: dry snow. The victim carried skiwear from ”Kjus” with integrated RECCO reflector.
Just to be clear, Recco does work and some Scottish MR teams do have them.
ACCIDENT REPORTS
Live rescue of avalanche victim with RECCO in Les Crosets (Les Portes du Soleil), Switzerland, February 13, 2016
Report by Francis Perrin, rescue manager in Champéry-Les Crosets
Saturday at around 1 p.m. a couple and their two children were skiing off piste in one of the gullies that go down to the resort when an avalanche, 40 m wide, 30 m long and 1 m deep buried the woman. Her husband immediately called the 144 central (Swiss national emergency number), which transferred the call to the ski patrol in Champéry, who quickly identified the position.
Two rescuers quickly drove to the area on a snowmobile and then skied the last part to the site. They immediately started a transceiver and RECCO search, along with spot probing at the same time.
After approximately 3 minutes of searching and around 40 m below their starting-point, one of the rescuers received a signal with the RECCO detector on maximum power. One minute later, after lowering the RECCO power 2 levels, the victim was pinpointed and confirmed with a probe.
In the meantime, a third rescuer had arrived and could help his colleagues dig and quickly uncovered the buried woman's head at a depth of approximately 80 cm. She was then dug out completely, safe and sound after 20-25 minutes of burial.
After confirmation that no more victims were buried, the additional resources including an avalanche dog from Avoriaz that was being brought by a MBH helicopter, as well as further helicopters from Air-Glaciers were cancelled.
The victim was able to ski down to the doctor’s office, where a doctor evaluated her and confirmed that she was physically OK. She then returned home to Champéry with her family.
The avalanche danger was rated considerable (4). None of the 4 skiers were equipped with avalanche transceivers.
Live rescue with RECCO detector in Sedrun, Switzerland, January 15, 2016
Report by Toni Cathomas, technical director Andermatt-Sedrun
On Friday afternoon, at 13h31, the rescue team received a call about an avalanche with two buried victims. The first rescuers arrived to the site 9 minutes later and in the meantime, one of the victims had been able to get out of the snow and help the second victim who was buried but visible.
It was then confirmed that a third person was still buried under the snow, so the rescuers called for more help from REGA and for a RECCO detector to be brought. The 3 rescuers started to search the avalanche with probes without success.
A fourth rescuer arrived at 14h10 bringing a RECCO detector and shortly afterwards he received a signal. The rescuers were able to dig out the unconscious avalanche victim before the arrival of the REGA helicopter. At 14h30, the REGA doctor arrived and treated the patient who was brought to hospital. The victim survived.
The size of the avalanche was 100 x 10 m, burial depth 1 m, total burial time 45 minutes. Snow conditions: dry snow. The victim carried skiwear from ”Kjus” with integrated RECCO reflector.
4
In reply to Jim Fraser:
Harmonic Radar relies on frequency doubling, its directional and very effective and not what I would call discrete. Its 917 MHz returning at 1834 MHz at about 1.5 watts. One Scottish MRT has used a drone effectivley on an ariel search this summer and seemed quite taken with it. Some off the shelf drones fly ok in 30 mph winds. A high spec drone has now been used with Recco fitted and has flown in adverse conditions and was tested and used in Morzine by the pisteurs. At the Scottish ski areas drones are common and flying in pretty amazing conditions and catching some great footage.
Basically anything that will vibrate such as metal work will have a harmonic so these background interferences need to be behind the searcher. However, it makes anything in front a possible find even if its just a phone. These are often found on the third pass of a debris pile with the detector held at a steeper angle and closer to the debris. The biggest search tool for Recco in the UK would be a SAR helo. The Coastguard have not shown any interest, but the Police with a Eurocopter as they use in Europe as a Recco search tool might work.
Harmonic Radar relies on frequency doubling, its directional and very effective and not what I would call discrete. Its 917 MHz returning at 1834 MHz at about 1.5 watts. One Scottish MRT has used a drone effectivley on an ariel search this summer and seemed quite taken with it. Some off the shelf drones fly ok in 30 mph winds. A high spec drone has now been used with Recco fitted and has flown in adverse conditions and was tested and used in Morzine by the pisteurs. At the Scottish ski areas drones are common and flying in pretty amazing conditions and catching some great footage.
Basically anything that will vibrate such as metal work will have a harmonic so these background interferences need to be behind the searcher. However, it makes anything in front a possible find even if its just a phone. These are often found on the third pass of a debris pile with the detector held at a steeper angle and closer to the debris. The biggest search tool for Recco in the UK would be a SAR helo. The Coastguard have not shown any interest, but the Police with a Eurocopter as they use in Europe as a Recco search tool might work.
1
In reply to Young Fox:
The way it has been presented to me is that with the aircraft on the DfT contract, the very demanding radio fit and associated EMC work is the aircraft manufacturer's work. That would appear to make adding Recco or other RF kit a job for Sikorsky. Oops.
The way it has been presented to me is that with the aircraft on the DfT contract, the very demanding radio fit and associated EMC work is the aircraft manufacturer's work. That would appear to make adding Recco or other RF kit a job for Sikorsky. Oops.
In reply to Jim Fraser:
Its a standard NATO comms connector Jim and as its so directional the pilot acts as the searcher and follows the signal/sound while the guy at the door just points it down. A winchman would just need to point it out the door and down while the pilot fly's a pattern search. When theres a return the door guy gets dropped off and pinpoints. Quite simple really and no effect on the avionics. So if the Sikorsky can fly it then it can be done. Not sure it will get in as close as the euro pilots are willing to do but worth a go maybe. 2 hours training and I would have them ready. Maybe one day ..............
Its a standard NATO comms connector Jim and as its so directional the pilot acts as the searcher and follows the signal/sound while the guy at the door just points it down. A winchman would just need to point it out the door and down while the pilot fly's a pattern search. When theres a return the door guy gets dropped off and pinpoints. Quite simple really and no effect on the avionics. So if the Sikorsky can fly it then it can be done. Not sure it will get in as close as the euro pilots are willing to do but worth a go maybe. 2 hours training and I would have them ready. Maybe one day ..............
Post edited at 18:59
1
In reply to James Jackson:
Climbing: a party of only two, walking into/out from a climb, taking a carefully and flexibly-chosen line often directly up or down the fall line of the slope, moving slowly (post-holing) with ample time to reflect on the conditions underfoot.
Skiing: a party of several, aiming to cover a lot of ground and therefore multiple slopes in the day, often aiming to traverse rather than stay on the fall line or slope margin, aiming to stay on rather than off skiable snow, with long blades attached to their feet.
I've done both: the above are my typical experiences. The skiing scenario looks to me as if it exposes me to a lot more avalanche risk. Your experience may differ, but I don't think stupid or poor practice apply. Do I carry probe, beacon and shovel when climbing now ? Sometimes, but I don't worry much if I don't - if I were doing long complex walk ins or something, maybe a little more so. Skiing ? Hell yeah.
Y
Climbing: a party of only two, walking into/out from a climb, taking a carefully and flexibly-chosen line often directly up or down the fall line of the slope, moving slowly (post-holing) with ample time to reflect on the conditions underfoot.
Skiing: a party of several, aiming to cover a lot of ground and therefore multiple slopes in the day, often aiming to traverse rather than stay on the fall line or slope margin, aiming to stay on rather than off skiable snow, with long blades attached to their feet.
I've done both: the above are my typical experiences. The skiing scenario looks to me as if it exposes me to a lot more avalanche risk. Your experience may differ, but I don't think stupid or poor practice apply. Do I carry probe, beacon and shovel when climbing now ? Sometimes, but I don't worry much if I don't - if I were doing long complex walk ins or something, maybe a little more so. Skiing ? Hell yeah.
Y
3
2
In reply to Yanchik:
Wise comments.
To add my tuppence - when ski touring if I am familiar with the terrain and snow pack and there is little chance of an avalanche - it's time to substitute the avie gear for another bottle of malt whisky.
Talking of kit, I have a recently serviced Ortovox M2 for sale £95.
Paraffin
Wise comments.
To add my tuppence - when ski touring if I am familiar with the terrain and snow pack and there is little chance of an avalanche - it's time to substitute the avie gear for another bottle of malt whisky.
Talking of kit, I have a recently serviced Ortovox M2 for sale £95.
Paraffin
2
In reply to paraffin:
Sell you a new Ortovox 3+ Paraffin and with a new shovel and probe only £230 and delivered to you at Glencoe - but no whiskey!
Sell you a new Ortovox 3+ Paraffin and with a new shovel and probe only £230 and delivered to you at Glencoe - but no whiskey!
1
In reply to Yanchik:
It's perfectly possible on skis to keep a running note of what conditions are doing - I'm always assessing, observing, feeling the snow on the move to make an assessment of what it's doing. Skinning up - yes traversing, but then one tends to skin up on definitely stable aspects. Skiing down - the fall line is where it's fun (modulo, as you say, keeping on skiable snow)! Long blades - opportunity to ski out of trouble, or move quickly across dodgy ground, or to ski-cut on dubious terrain.
The point isn't a 'my activity is safer than yours' cock-off as it's possible to spin it either way for either activity. I think the bottom line is that both activities expose the participants to avalanche risk (skiers do tend to care about it too, and not just go willy-nilly, but perhaps are more likely to be on marginal slopes, but with appropriate mitigation as above), and therefore I still wonder why climbers don't regularly take avi kit. Just look at the reports a couple of weekends ago from the Ben; a couple of avalanches one of which took a couple of climbers down the slope. Should they have been there? Who knows, I was looking at it from another slope so have no idea what conditions there felt like, but they were.
There's also the argument that most avalanches in Scotland aren't big enough to bury (but plenty enough to drag people over dangerous terrain). It's a fair comment, but there are also enough large-scale avalanches to not play the risk game.
On a looking out for each other note, as we should all do in the hills, I would also hate to be in a situation where something has set off near me and I'm not in a position to help - my kit lives in my pack all winter, and I always wear a transceiver even if out alone; they search as well as transmit...
It's perfectly possible on skis to keep a running note of what conditions are doing - I'm always assessing, observing, feeling the snow on the move to make an assessment of what it's doing. Skinning up - yes traversing, but then one tends to skin up on definitely stable aspects. Skiing down - the fall line is where it's fun (modulo, as you say, keeping on skiable snow)! Long blades - opportunity to ski out of trouble, or move quickly across dodgy ground, or to ski-cut on dubious terrain.
The point isn't a 'my activity is safer than yours' cock-off as it's possible to spin it either way for either activity. I think the bottom line is that both activities expose the participants to avalanche risk (skiers do tend to care about it too, and not just go willy-nilly, but perhaps are more likely to be on marginal slopes, but with appropriate mitigation as above), and therefore I still wonder why climbers don't regularly take avi kit. Just look at the reports a couple of weekends ago from the Ben; a couple of avalanches one of which took a couple of climbers down the slope. Should they have been there? Who knows, I was looking at it from another slope so have no idea what conditions there felt like, but they were.
There's also the argument that most avalanches in Scotland aren't big enough to bury (but plenty enough to drag people over dangerous terrain). It's a fair comment, but there are also enough large-scale avalanches to not play the risk game.
On a looking out for each other note, as we should all do in the hills, I would also hate to be in a situation where something has set off near me and I'm not in a position to help - my kit lives in my pack all winter, and I always wear a transceiver even if out alone; they search as well as transmit...
2
In reply to Young Fox:
Maybe.
See second email. (Error in first one.)
> ... Maybe one day ..............
Maybe.
See second email. (Error in first one.)
1
In reply to Young Fox:
Very kind offer £230 for the kit. If I do not sell my M2 soon - could I donate it to your beacon park, in return for a small of offering of single malt?
Very kind offer £230 for the kit. If I do not sell my M2 soon - could I donate it to your beacon park, in return for a small of offering of single malt?
1
In reply to paulh.0776:
I nearly needed a malt myself after tramping about this first thing Monday with a transceiver wondering if anyone was in it http://crankitupgear.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/size-3-avalanche-glencoe.html
I nearly needed a malt myself after tramping about this first thing Monday with a transceiver wondering if anyone was in it http://crankitupgear.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/size-3-avalanche-glencoe.html
1
In reply to Young Fox:
Yep, been watching that whole side of the hill - very nasty. Hopefully no one is under all that. And hopefully this weekend no one catches White Fever from it.
Yep, been watching that whole side of the hill - very nasty. Hopefully no one is under all that. And hopefully this weekend no one catches White Fever from it.
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Winter Conditions
This Winter Conditions page gives a summary of what is being climbed at the moment, what is 'in' nick and what the prospects are...
Loading Notifications...