Cpt.Caveman Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 peace thru power and war. Conquer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skisports Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 So you created peace in this post eh? By Conquering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt.Caveman Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Naw but I wasted a lot of time and entertained a number of people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 ya'll should note wind chill is a measure of how cold it feels to a warm human body, not a solid piece of rock or ice already at ambient environmental temperature (a.e.t.). The wind chill factor essentially describes how the skin is cooled more quickly with a wind than without (duh!). So something that's already at the a.e.t. will experience no cooling effect from the wind. In fact, something below a.e.t. will experince a wind warming effect! Surface moisture also plays a role, but not nearly as much as.... Â also, i'd agree that it best to be adventuresome and go back home only when you see it's shitty out from personal observations. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthumbs Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 I'm easily entertained. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthumbs Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 thank you Jeff Renner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt.Caveman Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 damnit someone figured me out. Back to my weatherman and puegot \ miata comments. Where is j_b now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 good. someone actually had something relevant to contribute on this. I was suspicious myself but did not follow through.  i'd agree that it best to be adventuresome and go back home only when you see it's shitty out from personal observations  if you don't stack the odds of success in your favor, you for sure are in for a lot of "adventure". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt.Caveman Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 I call it gaper-adventure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 nothing wrong with that. In the end it's the journey that matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Baer Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 ya'll should note wind chill is a measure of how cold it feels to a warm human body, not a solid piece of rock or ice already at ambient environmental temperature (a.e.t.). The wind chill factor essentially describes how the skin is cooled more quickly with a wind than without (duh!). So something that's already at the a.e.t. will experience no cooling effect from the wind. In fact, something below a.e.t. will experince a wind warming effect! Surface moisture also plays a role, but not nearly as much as.... Â Wind chill is due to two things that happen when wind blows across your skin: Â 1. it disturbs or destroys the thin insulating layer of air, warmed by your body, above your skin. 2. it accelerates the evaporation of moisture, which is an endothermic (cooling) process. Â These are basic physical phenomena and apply just as much to rock and ice as they do to people. But, the extent to which they affect different objects and surfaces does vary, and "wind chill" refers to the response of human skin specifically. So using a wind chill chart to predict snow conditions may not be very accurate. Â (Probably everyone has experienced the effect of #1 on sun-exposed rock on a cold day; it will be much warmer than the surrounding air if the winds are calm. #2 is one reason why thawed snow can crust up quickly on windy nights even when the temperature is above freezing - radiational loss of energy on clear nights is the other reason) Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 ouch! 2 flip-flops in a day about basic science, it does hurt. Â so the difference between surfaces results from radiation? Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Baer Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 so the difference between surfaces results from radiation? Â That's part of the total energy input/output of an object, but when it comes to the extent to which wind affects refreezing of snow, I think evaporation is the primary factor (and probably a minor one compared to nighttime radiation, which is independent of wind). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basil Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 Was up looking at Chair Peak yesterday (thursday). Although the Alpental telemetry site said that the temp warmed with elevation, the only place where the snow was soft was in the sun. The north face had very little coverage compared to usual, 1/2" of very clear ice...way thin, little snow. So in spite of what the temperature sensors were saying, the inversion didn't seem to be as intense as they said, although it was warmer than down in the valley. My thought is that the pressure-differential generated wind which keeps the passes cold by bringing air from the east side was also flowing up into the valley and reducing the inversion effects there. Â cheers, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 We didn't get a sense of an inversion yesterday (Friday) at Chair Peak. The snow never got mushy, even on the summit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fleblebleb Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I got much firmer snow/ice down low on Guye than up higher. Maybe all of Chair Peak was in the warmer air, which wasn't that warm anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambone Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 It was pretty cold on Chair, definately below freezing. The snow was either very crusty or very sugary, but not mushy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skisports Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 You could see where the inversion layer was on the trees heading to Chair. Since Chair is north-facing conditions would be colder. But on the approach you could see the snow on the trees and then it started to dissipate. I am not sure how high or low. Even on the approach to chair there we sections of snow that would of made great skiing that snow was in the inversion layer. I am guessing the inversion layer is between 3-7000 feet and it fluctuated as the week went on. So that was why the condition on guye were better lower then higher Dave  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracked Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Second what Lambone said. It seemed pretty cold. The hard snow created easy climbing, but since the crust had powder 6 inches beneath it, much of it was unprotectable. Still, we had quite some fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.