 Poster: A snowHead
|
@mishmash, stop it or I’ll start looking…
@BobinCH, depends largely on the quality of the pant though haha
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Is there any concern about buying a used airbag rather than new? Are they still safe if bought on the secondary market?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| mwhalber wrote: |
| Is there any concern about buying a used airbag rather than new? Are they still safe if bought on the secondary market? |
You can get them serviced and personally I would if I was buying a used one
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
@mwhalber, I echo what @jedster, says, depends what it is and who has had it previously, and that it has been properly looked after. I have a 24L Vario (with other various sized zip-ons and carbon canister) for sale currently (as mentioned above), sold my wife's last week and the first thing I said to the buyer when he collected it is do a test fire and get a refill/ exchange of the carbon canister and trigger for 25€. He did and has texted me to say he's very happy with it, if he wasn't i'd have had it back, a life saving piece of kit needs to be good for all parties, and I want to ensure anyone who buys my kit is happy and does the right thing by ensuring they are able to deploy it properly and the kit works for them. For example there was a ABS trigger recall a few years ago, mine was done and sent back to ABS in Germany returned FOC and no need for any updates, are they all done on the second hand market, who knows?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@Markymark29, any details on what u are selling? Feel free to DM if you have a moment.
@jedster, thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| mishmash wrote: |
| phil_w wrote: |
| mishmash wrote: |
| ... there are some examples of the beep being ripped away entirely hence more focus on harness etc. .. |
Can you post links to the incidents you're referring to please?
That sounds like nonsense to me, but I'm happy to learn what you know. |
https://backcountryaccess.com/en-gb/blog/p/where-to-wear-your-avalanche-transceiver
Quote : “Last season, a skier on the Bugaboos to Roger Pass traverse took a ride in an avalanche. He pulled his airbag and was fortunately not buried, and he suffered only a minor knee injury. The skier was quite shaken up though and early the next morning he realized that his avalanche transceiver was missing. He had been carrying it in the side pocket of his ski pants and the avalanche had ripped the pocket and the transceiver was never located. They called for a helicopter and abandoned the rest of the traverse.
It has become fairly common for backcountry skiers and boarders to carry their transceiver in a pants pocket with the new outerwear styles and bib pants.
However, carrying your avalanche transceiver in your pants pocket should only be done if the pocket is designed accordingly: welded or stitched to the inside of the pants, with a solid, anchored clip for attaching the lanyard. If your pants pocket is sewn or welded to the outside of your pants and is clearly not designed for a transceiver, then we recommend that you carry it in the chest harness provided with your transceiver.”
https://www.wildsnow.com/29225/wear-beacon-in-pocket-vs-harness/
Note also carry advice from other Transceiver manufacturers.
Please note that I’m not anti-pocket carry as do so myself from time to time. Not sure why you think its nonsense though - that’s a strong emotional reaction to reasonable factual proposition. It doesn’t encourage considered debate. |
Interesting and important post! I took a tumble on a piste couple of years ago, subsequently realised I was minus my phone, my pocket had been ripped open and my phone ended up on a different location to me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avalanche airbag.....???????!!!!!!!???????
That's a knee slapper if ever there was. Thanx. I needed a good joke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
@Death2PC, not particularly enlightening reply - care to elaborate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| mishmash wrote: |
| ... there are some examples {1,2} of the beep being ripped away entirely hence more focus on harness etc. .. |
Sorry, I'd missed that. Thanks for the links.
That one incident is useful to know about, but it concerns someone incorrectly using the transceiver.
My mistake: I thought you were claiming you had evidence that a pocket carry as per the manufacturers' precise instructions was risky, which thanks to your clarification I see you're not.
That's why I asked for references - it seemed unlikely. I'm seeing more and more people using their pocket, not fewer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Given where this thread is going does anyone have a view, or better data, on the much repeated "advice" to turn off your phone so it doesn't interfere with transceiver. I can believe it marginally affects range but digital devices on the same frequency should be well isolated. It feels a bit like the pseudo science you often get on these type of issues, gets repeated and then becomes an unproven but 'accepted' thesis. A small loss of range seems not that big a deal compared to being able to act calmly and quickly. And many serious situations are helped / avoided / dealt with with access to a phone.
So given the importance of having a phone, and being able to access it quickly I am far from convinced turning it off is a net safety improvement.
Thoughts? Data?
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| davidof wrote: |
| pisteoff wrote: |
| Given where this thread is going does anyone have a view, or better data, on the much repeated "advice" to turn off your phone so it doesn't interfere with transceiver. |
if you have the mobile phone switched on and a beacon in the same pocket it will reduce the overall range in the initial search but has very little affect in the fine search - even with an old single antenna beacon. |
Ah excellent - so would you agree, OK to leave phone on, try to keep phone and transceiver on different parts of your body, but not crucial?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
@pisteoff, the signal acquisition distance was quite significantly reduced, with the phone on top of the "victim" beacon. So there's a risk of missing the original signal if you have a large area to cover and use a wide search strip. On that basis I'd never carry a phone and a beacon in the same pocket.
IIRC the interference is less if the phone is in flight mode. It doesn't take long to turn flight mode off, so that seems a sensible precaution. Another option is a faraday pouch. I keep meaning to get one and test whether or not it actually has any effect, but haven't got round to it yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| pisteoff wrote: |
Ah excellent - so would you agree, OK to leave phone on, try to keep phone and transceiver on different parts of your body, but not crucial? |
I normally carry my phone switched on; just keep beacon and phone apart. Erm well I've done zero touring this year due to time / snow conditions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@davidof, thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Had a conversation about this recently, and the "received" wisdom was that it seemed to affect the searchers transceiver principally. They were saying that you get more echo/false signals if your mobile is on while you're searching.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
