In reply to kenr:
Thanks Ken. I hadn't seen that.
This was interesting:
Q. I was riveted by this terrific narrative and the accompanying visuals. It left me wondering about the connection between the air bags deployed by Ms. Saugstad and her survival. Is there any information about their effectiveness in an avalanche. — 57pm, Philadelphia
A. Air bags are a touchy subject in the backcountry world. At the 2012 International Snow Science Workshop in Anchorage, where I was one of about 700 attendees, they were a hot topic. Although the research is thin but growing quickly, there is little doubt that air bags can help increase the odds of surviving an avalanche. You are probably safer with one than without one — or, at least, not less safe. And Elyse Saugstad is, of course, a huge believer in them. She credits hers for saving her life.
But people who spend their lives teaching avalanche safety worry that backcountry users will rely too heavily on them — that they will see them as another store-bought tool of invincibility, leading them to make bad decisions, the way (perhaps) people who wear helmets might drive motorcycles differently than they would without a helmet.
A related issue is terrain. Success rates with air bags seem to be higher in places where avalanches slide mostly above timberline, like Alaska and Europe. But in places like the continental United States and Canada, where avalanches often flow through obstacles like trees, the survival rates appear to be lower.
Trauma, after all, is responsible for about a quarter of avalanche deaths. Which brings us back to Elyse. Perhaps her air bag allowed her to ride higher in the avalanche, closer to the tops of the trees, so she missed the blunt trauma collisions that the other victims suffered. But many experts warned me: she is lucky to be alive.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/22/sports/q-a-the-avalanche-at-tunnel-creek....
