| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jtnc
Joined: 09 Jan 2010
Posts: 1
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, since i can't seem to upload photo's with the posting. I did
upload one photo of the slide on S. Diamond to the avalanche
section
http://www.powderbuzz.com/forums/album_page.php?pic_id=239
Not the best as it's shot from Montgomery, but does have the benefit
of having a helicopter in the photo. A couple others taken ~4pm
from the CP parking lot came out a better, or at least
show more definition of the slides in the gully and south face.
I can confirm that the debris got into the trees. In several of
my photo's several debris "fingers" cross the skier tracks across
the bench and go farther into the trees.
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
d-rock

Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 144
Location: Fort Collins, CO
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nice work jtnc, perfect timing w/ heli. _________________ work it.....work it...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ry_Guy

Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 177
Location: Fort Collins
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, looks pretty simalure from year to year..... _________________ www.CameronPass.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Patricio
Joined: 26 Mar 2008
Posts: 23
Location: Laramie, WY
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a pic that I took yesterday (1/9/2010) from the top of Monty Bowls:
Monty bowls was a bit crowded yesterday, but a great bluebird day. Lots of fun. Glad I wasn't up on S. Diamond. _________________ The only thing that matters is the size of your smile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Michigander
Joined: 17 Mar 2008
Posts: 12
Location: Fort Collins, CO
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 11:25 am Post subject: 1.9.2010 Slide |
|
|
There was a lot of confusion on the mountain yesterday about this slide. It seemed like a lot of people didn't even notice it happen! About 30 minutes after the slide a group was digging a pit on the summit of SD as if they were planning to ski a line off of it.
I witnessed the slide as I was skinning up one of the minor ridges in the trees below Pabst. I also ran into the group that triggered it on an earlier lap. The group was two skiers and a snowboarder on snowshoes. I chatted with them about their plans and one of them seemed very confident about "climbing the ridge" and dropping into the "slope near the trees." He said he watched another group dig a pit and he looked at the CAIC website that morning. Seeing that a pit with "slab over sugar" and an avalanche rating of considerable didn't seem to phase him I offered my two cents about staying below treeline.
On my next climb up I saw one of the skiers ascending to lookers right of Pabst. I'm not really sure where he thought he was going? When I was about 50 meters away, just below treeline, the skier above me shouted that he just felt a collapse. He moved again and then the whole slope above and to the left of him collapsed. Luckily the skier and his two partners, who were on the next minor ridge over stayed out of the slide which funneled into the gully between them. I didn't stick around to do any quantifiable analysis of the slide, but I estimate the crown height as 12-24 inches and the debris pile as 4-8 feet deep.
After making sure everyone was OK, I headed north to ski some different trees and I talked with a few skiers about the slide on the way. No one seemed that interested in the news and people continued skiing Ptarmigan (which I know often has very different snowpack conditions than adjoining slopes, but still there was just a huge slide on a similar slope and aspect!).
I don't want this to sound like a rant, but I've been very disappointed with the decision making I've seen up at CP so far this season. In late December I saw a lot of lines skied on SD that I would never consider skiing on sketchy early-season snowpack. I don't know if this is just powder fever or a lack of information, but people seem to be accepting a lot of risk this season. I'm not one to impart my judgement on other people, but maybe my comments to this group pre-avalanche were more on the "Too Light" than "Too Heavy" side of the spectrum. I don't want to "turn people back" like mentioned in other threads, but I wonder what this group needed to hear in order to understand the risk they were taking? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
d-rock

Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 144
Location: Fort Collins, CO
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting report Michigander, checked out the slide today. Very impressive. Probed some of the run out, some spots over 8 feet deep. Ran over a lot of tracks. Here's a few pics (took a bunch!)
 _________________ work it.....work it...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
distantfellow
Joined: 19 May 2008
Posts: 105
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hard chunks.
Imagine what it could do to your leg...
Lots of debris, eh? Everyone love debris pictuers, right?
Pit dug on N/Ne aspect on S. Shoulder. 30cm of + on top of 65cm of / (95cm slab) on top of 65cm+ of FC and ^. CT-9 at facets, ECT-14 at facets. Quality 2 shears.
The Slab.
The D-Rock skinning up N. Diamond...
Then executing some really cool surfy turns down it.
Cheers |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Proslogger

Joined: 27 Oct 2007
Posts: 47
|
Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Any updates this week? Looking to head up Sat., and wondering if things have settled a bit since Sunday. Cheers |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
d-rock

Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 144
Location: Fort Collins, CO
|
Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was up yesterday, felt like spring!! Was with a sorta newbie, so we took it pretty mellow. Most of the open chutes under the Diamond were tracked out. Southerly aspects has a sun crust. Northerly has better snow. Did get a CT21 Q1, top 35cm. The mid-pack seems to be getting stonger, no failure at bootom of snowpack. Total depth 7 feet. Pit was at SE aspect treeline. _________________ work it.....work it...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
npg
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 5
|
Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Anybody get a recent look at the east side of Nokhu? Possibly heading up there on Saturday considering how warm it's been and was wondering if there were any slides in Nokhuloir or Grand Central. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
distantfellow
Joined: 19 May 2008
Posts: 105
|
Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From last Friday. Coverage looks good. If you do go up, pleas let us know what you find. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Proslogger

Joined: 27 Oct 2007
Posts: 47
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2010 6:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thanks fellas, sounds like overall pretty good news. happy turns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
drh
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 66
Location: FC
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2010 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
easy npg- "Continue to use caution in your terrain selection. Poor snowpack structure and persistent weak layers exist in our current snowpack. In isolated areas, these triggered avalanches have potential to be large events failing in the lower snowpack weak layers." caic
not preaching- just saying _________________ "We need to make the pie higher" GW Bush |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Matt
Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 18
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:06 pm Post subject: whomping |
|
|
| went up today and skied the south side of the diamond. I guess it was more exploring but had some whommping in the snow along with a shallow snow pack |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
npg
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 5
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Didn't make an attempt at Nokhu and instead opted for Braddock Peak which surprisingly had a lone snowboard track down the NE chute. Had to turn around a couple hundred feet from the top due to broken binding, but dug a pit at treeline facing NE. Will post a pictures later, but the snowpack was 145cm deep with the bottom 65cm being complete sugar. The top 80cm was divided into 3 hard slabs. Interestingly enough, we did perform a Rutschblock test at another pit further below that passed with multiple hard jumps. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|