forrest_m

i think the issue with the stats is that the ridgerest has a higher R value when brand new and in laboratory conditions, but my experience is that the evazote winter pad is significantly warmer once the edges of all the ridgerest cells start to break down and fold over. the thin parts of the RR are thinner, and thus more prone to damage when you are cooking inside the tend and what have you. at least, my partner in AK the last two years was always ending up migrating onto from his RR to my EW in the middle of the night...

i made a really good stove board this spring by cutting a sheet of the 1/2" x 1/2" plastic grid (made for ceiling light fixtures) into a round sheet sized to fit into the pot. I cut a slightly smaller circle out of a sheet of metal flashing (i do a lot of shopping for the outdoors at home depot) and attached it to the grid with baling wire, leaving about 4 inches of wire loose past the connection. finally, i put 3 short sheet metal screws through the flashing in a triangle sized to catch the base of the xgk. the loose wire wraps around the stove base as well for a bomber connection. this gizmo insulated well enough to use the xgk inside the tent without scorching/melting the foam pad and is very light. i think by mid-may, you can probably leave the headlamp at home. certainly, by june 1, you can read inside your tent all night w/o a headlamp.

wow, that looks in about 100,000 times betterer conditions than when colin & i did it two years ago. nice work, gents!

having thought about this for a few days, i think the main issue is that it is too dry, i.e. this cold weather spell in a normal winter would have produced a good line, but there's just not enough water in the snow above to make up for the ice that is evaporating off the top of the flows and melting off the sun-warmed rock. Ade told me that similarly, the north face of dragontail had no ice at all last w/e! of course, a normal winter would add another 4 miles of road hiking to the approach unless you have a snow machine. just to clarify dan's post a bit, we were essentially trying to follow the right-hand line in the MattP's famous photo, but each tier of ice kept turning out to be not in (not touched down, only an inch thick, very sun-rotted, etc.), so we would bypass on rock to the right. the rock on sloan is very compact, so in two cases, we had to traverse almost a full pitch rightwards to find a line that we could climb/protect. thus we ended up too far right to easily get back to the major flow (that did look like it _might_ have been in) on the upper face. the rock we did climb was in the M4-M5 range, so we were not up for trying the much steeper/blanker looking stuff that would have gotten us there. however, in fatter conditions, there would be at least three independent 5-6 pitch ice lines on the face. very rockies-esque. also, where there is shade (i.e. the gully down low there was plenty of ice), it's just the ice on the face that is exposed to the sun. i'll post some pics when i get my film back.

have you tried the BC Base Map Viewer ? Only works for British columbia and is a wee bit cumbersome, but has an awful lot of information.

i don't see the logic in that. just because you make some improvement doesn't mean that you've made a *net* improvement. if you walk into a kitchen store and break an expensive bowl, does it make it all better if you then sweep up half of the broken glass? i think it's WAY too early to tell what the meaning or effect of the election was. as for the lack of liberal reaction, one can hope for the best for the iraqi people while still feeling that the entire invasion was misconceived and, indeed, knowingly put forth under false premises. it would not really be ethical to hope that iraq goes (further) down the toilet just so that bushco end up with egg on their face. that puts many of us who disagree with the administration in the position of hoping that we're wrong while fearing that we are not.

paging archduke ferdinand.

did you see this recent thread where we discussed the free topo & aerial photo software available to make your life easier and more efficient?

anyone else read this yet: "out of thin air" , cover story in this week's seattle weekly? i thought it was an interesting, non-sensationalistic take on an accident/rescue in the mainstream press. he gives a pretty matter-of-fact description of the process from slip, to rescue, to hospital to rehab. kind of like an extended ANAM piece.

yes, the problem is that to get free photos from terraserver, you have to download a huge bunch of screenshots and stitch them together in photoshop (or pay a bunch of $ to subscribe to terraserver), photomaps automates that for you and lets you toggle back and forth to usgs topo maps.

“The goal of physical training for alpine climbing can be summed up in one phrase: to make yourself as indestructable as possible. The harder you are to kill, the longer you will last in the mountains.” useful when trying to decide if you really need to go running tonight.

jeez, i think i'm writing a "me too" post to CBS... glassgowkiss wrote: yeah, it's such an unspoken law that apparently nobody else has ever heard it. for better or worse, the vast majority of climbing literature deals with death, that's what makes it interesting and meaningful. and, yeah, what CBS said, books about things that happened a long time ago can be valuable, it's called history. if i understand you correctly, your other main objection to the book is that instead of focusing on the latest cutting edge alpinism, it chooses some less cutting edge climbs to talk about. it disturbs you that these are chosen because they are five women who climbed a single mountain, and that criteria doesn't interest you. it appears, from the promotional material, that the author is using this selection process to make a point about women and society, though of course, we don't know what that point is, since neither of us have read her book. i have no further comment.

fern wrote: from the site fern is pointing at:

from what i have read, the problem exists generally with older beacons because of three related issues: 1) older technology made hitting precisely 457 kHz difficult, so beacons were built to receive a relatively broad range of frequencies on or around 457. 2) this is exacerbated by the tendency of older analog beacons to "drift," i.e. even if they were transmitting exactly at 457 when new, over time they wander a bit. i'm not too clear on why this happens, let's call it "age" 3) conversely, there is an inverse relationship between receiving range and signal-width reception, i.e. in order to receive at longer distances, beacons are forced to receive a narrower range of frequencies. this becomes a problem, because newer beacons have made a great effort to increase range; since digital processing requires stronger signals to work, 1st generation digital beacons had a lot less range than analogs. this has been addressed in newer beacons by improvements in technology that allow them to hit a narrower "window" around 457 kHz, and therefore allow the range to come back up. so, in conclusion, the newer beacons can sometimes have problems receiving older beacons, but usually not vice-versa. newer beacons should also not have any trouble receiving each other, even across brands, because they are conforming more closely to an international standard. the question for me is whether over time the newer beacons will suffer similar drift and become completely useless, or if the same improvements that increase signal accuracy will prevent this... at least the self-diagnostic routine on most digital beacons should be able to tell you if you've drifted off frequency. bottom line is that it is as important as ever to check that everyone is compatible before skiing away from the trailhead...

i recently upgraded to a DSP and have the same comments as downfall - it is very easy to use & the distance reading seems pretty darn accurate. i really like the scan feature that lets you quickly see how many beacons are within 5m, 20m and 60m - good for the trailhead check as well as multiple burial scenarios. in a recent practice session, my DSP had over twice the range of late model barryvox & tracker beacons, which is huge. i also like the fact that there is a headphone-out jack if you want to get the signals "direct" without processing - a good backup that adds to my peace of mind. one disappointment was that i was psyched to finally have 2 beacons, so that i could practice alone, but my ~12 year old arva is invisible to the DPS, i assume due to signal drift. the arva, OTOH, picks up the DPS just fine. so far, my old arva is the only "invisible" beacon i've encountered, but it makes me worry that i'll go on a trip with someone with an older beacon and it won't work. (of course, since i'm the biggest gear troglodyte out there, maybe i'm the last one with an old beacon and this won't be an issue...) one other minor disappointment is that it has no automatic return to transmit feature, although it is set up to let you "slap" the recieve switch easily back into transmit. i'm less worried about getting caught in a second slide, and more worried about accidentally burying a "receive" beacon during a practice session... i haven't had much of a chance to test this, but one of the reasons i was keen on the DSP is that i understand that the third antenna simplifies the final approach to deep burials, since it can lead you in on the flux line in 3D, rather than tracking to the point where the horizontal projection of the flux line emerges from the snow pack. anyone have any practice with a DSP in deep burials (> 1 meter)?

Ade - Have you tried USA Photo Maps ? A free program that pulls usgs data and automatically stiches the maps together, along with linking to aerial photos? Based on langitude/longitude, interfaces with GPS units, did i mention that it's free? edited to fix link

(reposted from the other thread) jayB wrote: thank you, that is exactly my point. the story of them being the first women in this instance is interesting because in addition to the mountaineering story, there is also the issue of overcoming prejudice and stereotypes. though i have not read the book, i can certainly imagine that this COULD make an interesting story. in the hands of a hack, it could be patronizing and it might make me want to puke, but it could also be inspiring. i certainly don't know one way or the other. what pisses me off is the blanket dismissal of this author as "feminist bullshit", as if feminism is some kind of bad word. to me, people overcoming the limitations that other people want to put on them is inspiring. at heart, that's what feminism is about. bob, i'm not sure what the point of listing WR's impressive resume is. noone is disputing the fact that she was a badass climber. but why do you think women started putting together "women's" expeditions in the 1970s. Could it be because many talented women climbers couldn't get their foot in the door with the climbing establishment that controlled funding for the more conventional expeditions? it seems to me that the fact that WR climbed everest with an austrian team before being invited to join later polish expeditions kind of proves my point, but i don't know the details, so maybe not. women's expeditions have gone out of fashion and maybe they're no longer necessary. maybe that's a sign of progress, but it doesn't mean that they were ridiculous in their time. forrest_m proud son of an unrepentant feminist

jayB wrote: thank you, that is exactly my point. the story of them being the first women in this instance is interesting because in addition to the mountaineering story, there is also the issue of overcoming prejudice and stereotypes. though i have not read the book, i can certainly imagine that this COULD make an interesting story. in the hands of a hack, it could be patronizing and it might make me want to puke, but it could also be inspiring. i certainly don't know one way or the other. what pisses me off is the blanket dismissal of this author as "feminist bullshit", as if feminism is some kind of bad word. to me, people overcoming the limitations that other people want to put on them is inspiring. at heart, that's what feminism is about. bob, i'm not sure what the point of listing WR's impressive resume is. noone is disputing the fact that she was a badass climber. but why do you think women started putting together "women's" expeditions in the 1970s. Could it be because many talented women climbers couldn't get their foot in the door with the climbing establishment that controlled funding for the more conventional expeditions? it seems to me that the fact that WR climbed everest with an austrian team before being invited to join later polish expeditions kind of proves my point, but i don't know the details, so maybe not. women's expeditions have gone out of fashion and maybe they're no longer necessary. maybe that's a sign of progress, but it doesn't mean that they were ridiculous in their time. forrest_m proud son of an unrepentant feminist

ok, I should know better than to try to engage bob in a reasoned discussion, but what the hell. bob, I don’t think the feminist movement requires a “conspiracy” theory for its validity. it’s a simple fact that in virtually every field, women were considered less able or simple incapable of performing at a level equal with men. this has been true for MOST OF HUMAN HISTORY. in its simplest terms, feminism has been the story of women in field after field having to overcome prejudices and stereotypes – and if you look at the wage disparity between men and women in identical positions, it’s pretty obvious that the “conspiracy” is still going strong. in what sense was high-altitude mountaineering NOT a traditionally male arena in the 1980s? in the bad old days – by which I mean the 1970s – it was virtually impossible to climb in the himalaya without being invited on a national team. those national selections were almost be definition an “old boy’s club.” are you proposing that wanda rutkiewicz did not have to overcome any prejudice? that she was openly accepted with no argument by all the men of the polish climbing community? gimme’ a break – or quote your source, because I have a hard time believing your claim that “wanda shared this opinion.” female climbers have zero interest in this kind of climbing? news flash, most male climbers have no interest in that kind of climbing, either. that’s not the point. the point is that twenty years ago, in addition to all the other difficulties in pursuing high altitude climbing, women who WERE interested had some ADDITIONAL difficulties that men didn’t have to face. that’s not “pseudo-feminism,” it’s the real thing, full bore, 100 proof feminism, and worthy of respect.

dru wrote: oh, well i guess that settles that.

dru, the ratings sections of the newer elaho guides (swbc, waddington) call it ED1. i know kevin & don spent a LOT of time trying to find good N. American examples for each of the alpine grades, that's good enough for me. (p.s. the nose is still grade VI, even though it's been done in < 4 hours)

yup, in the rockies, every tom, dick and jane is jumping from hafner creek straight to ED routes

try nws west slope cascades forecast

frickin' TANSTAAFL gets me every time