philfort

The only time I've been there, it had two naked scandinavian-looking girls in it (and their boyfriends/husbands )

Maybe you could go check it out: "Nobody, save a few brave rock climbers, geologists, engineers and highway workers, is being allowed up Highway 20 beyond Newhalem, so precarious is the fractured mountainside" ???

Kind of looks like Beckey on the cover of Challenge of the North Cascades, but no rope...

You obviously have very weak google skills. That took about 2 minutes to find.

FWIW, on my questionably accurate scale: size 26.5 TLT4 pro's with thermoflex: 5lbs 14oz size 27 MLT4 with stock liners: 5lbs 6oz size 27 MLT4 with thermoflex liner from the TLT4: 4lbs 14oz

This is shocking to say the least. Ben's trip reports were always inspirational - the stuff he was doing was amazing. I looked forward to his future accomplishments, and hoped that I might end up skiing with him at some point. very sad...

Jimmy it sounds like you're looking for answers. Here's my answer: get dynafit. No reason to lug around an extra 2 pounds on your feet. I imagine they would be hard to get into on a firm 45 degree slope though.

Given that its currently 40 degrees at the pass, and the forecast is "SCATTERED EVENING SHOWERS" tonight, and sunny tomorrow.... I'd say you're dreaming.

I thought the washouts were on the west side, near Colonial Creek and Pyramid Lake... that area barely gets any snow.

october skiing = sand ...though it's already snowing at steven's pass....

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/regions/NorthCentral/Maint/Area3/nc2004/

Can't you start from the last switchback of the road, just below the parking lot (where its next to the river), for a brush-free route?

c'mon sam, Beck must know. He's been in meetings all week with president of the DOT Their website says it's going to be closed at Colonial Creek campground for the winter. Is this really true??? Usually closes at the Ross Lake TH...

My dynafit crampons are 5oz - pretty light nonetheless. I don't use them that often, and generally only in early spring, but several times I've encountered conditions where they're pretty essential - a hard thin icy crust on top of slush, where you need both the flotation of skis and the bite of crampons.

Do you mean the nice ridgeline that starts about a 1/2 mile north of pk 8395? I was up on 8395 a few weeks ago looking at that. What I could see looked like major choss - mostly straightforward looking, but very steep getting up to 8395.

Seems like sometimes they have them, sometimes they don't. Not sure how accurate this is, but this website has the freezing level "contours" drawn in. Looks warm on the east side too. http://www.snow-forecast.com/maps/vanlapse72.php whee! rain and 10000ft snow level!

alt-PrintScrn to put an image of the document window in the clipboard. Then open mspaint or your favourite paint program, paste the image in, and crop to your content..

We were a few miles north of you. Made it to 6800ft (haha) and took a couple of runs - the turns were actually pretty nice, all things considered . Definitely full on winter conditions high up, and large cornices for October. The gore-tex had no effect on the rain and wet snow coming down hard on the way out.

Did you do the Castle peaks, and if so, how was it? The traverse looked interesting when I was on Gothic. We were across the valley yesterday on Addison Ridge. Reached the ridge-top but not much more. Can't say I recommend it, although the Gemini peaks looked ok.

Did he do it with Serl?

...except the route is "North face/North Ridge", so maybe the arrow is the north face, but it's not the route (or at least not the route that most people do). At least I think. The description is confusing, but the actual climb is not (at least not until the last pitch or two, which we didn't complete). Instead of "left foot, right foot", it could say "go up from Burgundy col easiest way". Top of the peak is confusing though... I certainly couldn't make any sense of it... I think the over-extensive description and crazy detailed topo of the Burgundy summit block is a "Beckey-ism classic" and should be left as is

It's on the right face. Beckey's arrow is wrong!

Most cars I see get their turns signals mixed up when changing lanes into a left turn lane. They don't signal when doing the lane change (but they should), and then they do signal when turning (which may be unnecessary, since left turns are all you can do from a left turn lane anyway, so it's not really "signalling" anything) And then there are the people who make a mistake by getting into the wrong lane, and come to a stop while trying to get into the correct lane (which will be impossible for some time to come since it is full of cars), thereby blocking all traffic behind them.... inconveniencing everyone else, instead of themselves, who made the mistake. I see it nearly everyday on the way to work...

That's saying you shouldn't enter the intersection, unless you can get out of it (i.e. there aren't cars on the other side of the intersection blocking where you're trying to go). Which is another thing that pisses me off! Talk about tying up traffic! Selfish !@#$% who end up stuck in the middle of the intersection when it turns green for the other folks! I'm not sure this is applying to moving into the intersection when you're doing a left turn (unless there are cars blocking the street you're turning left into)

I don't know about in WA, but where I come from, that is not a law. In fact in driving school you are taught to pull into the intersection when turning left, so you keep traffic flowing. From what I understand, you don't need to go to driving school in WA to get a license... i.e. you can just go take the tests and get it? This would seem to encourage proliferation of bad habits, as parents/friends teach new drivers how to drive, instead of professionals. Hence all the clueless drivers here. And what is it with people who come to full stops at yield signs when there is no traffic? And then have the incorrect (right side) turn signal on?