Welcome to SP!  -
Areas & RangesMountains & RocksRoutesImagesArticlesTrip ReportsGearOtherPeoplePlans & PartnersWhat's NewForum

Rescue on Mount Shasta

Mountaineering, rock climbing, and hiking news.
 

Postby The Chief » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:24 pm

mrchad9 wrote:Perhaps if the CHP and Siskiyou County would stop this frivolous use of helicopters ... It is the continued use of these toys in unnecessary situations that encourages inexperienced people to take these risks, so assign some of the blame where it belongs.


Frivolous...Toys....blame?

The use of the CHP AS350 is SAR SOP throughout the State of CA.

Vitaliy M wrote:COOL? In my age group I have to do cocaine, drive my mother's 60K car, and go to bars 3 times a week to be cool..I would be so cool if I was 40 years older : (
jk


Ah, how often do you really get out and up here to these hills where all the folks that are your age are coming to and play cool gigs on the boulders, ice, rock etc etc??

By your post, it is obvious not too often if even any.
Last edited by The Chief on Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Chief

 
Thanked: time in post

Postby kevin trieu » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:28 pm

Bombchaser wrote:
kevin trieu wrote:
Bombchaser wrote:
kevin trieu wrote:
Bombchaser wrote:A lenticular cloud is a warning of a coming cold front, escpecially if high clouds are increasing. However they can also form from changes in the jet stream or wind direction at high altitude. Lenticular clouds can lower onto the top of large mountains producing localized severe weather. I have had first hand experience of this. I had a lenticular form out of a perfectly sunny day. The windchill hit -35, 60+ mph winds, whiteout conditions from blowing ice and snow. This lasted for about two hours. I was wearing 6 layers of clothes, heavy mitts, and mountaineering boots. Had I left this gear and went up in light clothes I may have died. I later saw that this was produced by a cold front moving into Canada. After the lenticular dissapated it returned to sunny weather. I was caught in the lenticular at the 13,000+ foot summit. The mountain was also covered in snow and ice. Having the clothes, ability to navigate, and saftey gear kept me from ruining my trip.


So you didn’t go down after seeing the lenticular cloud but chose instead to wait it out?


In my case, based on my experience, I made the decision to continue. I was at about 12,000 or so when it started forming. I had looked at weather models before I left and had a good idea of where things were at. I had all of the proper gear and was not on a highly technical route. So based on my experience level, and knowledge I made the decision to continue. I had a good idea this was a localized event since it was forming from the summit outward. Now if I had been at my car, and looked up and seen this, I would have likely discontinued my attempt.


1. Your experience told you to continue higher into forming lentucular clouds?
2. What weather models were you looking at? Did the models tell that the storm was going to last for only two hours?
3. So you continued because the stakes were higher and you were closer to the summit. What's the difference between the decision to continue whether you are at the car or 200 feet from the summit? Shouldn't it be the same?


Again, this was a judgement call. I had the experience, I had the gear. The route was not technical. This is why I continued. The weather models I saw didn't show a cold front would enter this region. My experience with weather said that since there was no high clouds above the lenticular that I had plenty of time to make the summit and return. This is all based on my training and experience. If this was Mount Hood, or Shasta the bid would have been called off. If the cloud had gotten more intense, I could have hunkered down since I had the proper gear with me. Doing most of my climbing in the winter, I'm used to dealing with harsh weather conditions and all of my gear has been tested out on smaller peaks so that I know i can survive in these types of conditions. I was not just some joe blow who had never been on a mountain. with no training, and no gear. It is not uncommon to get conditions like this on a major summit. Many climbers continue to climb in this. Based on all of the circumstances and info I had, I decided it was safe enough to continue. Had there been high clouds moving in before I lost sight of the sky, I would have turned back immediately.

How do I test my gear? When the weather is forecasted to be severe, I will go out on smaller peaks to experience those conditions and try out my gear. This way when I do get caught on a major summit I don't panic and know what to do. I have a lot of small peaks I have climbed on my list. Most were done in winter like conditions. I'm also not saying I'm not above making mistakes, I'm human. I have had some close calls. But I do not go unprepared, that is the difference. I have the gear and know how to use the gear. I don't do a lot of roped climbs because I don't have a lot of experience with this. But you don't see me attempting Mount Hoods North Face either!! :wink:


So why would you not go if you were your car but continue to go higher from 12,000' given the same conditions? What are the deciding factors?
User Avatar
kevin trieu

 
Posts: 934
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:59 pm
Location: Laguna Hills, California, United States
Thanked: 78 times in 55 posts

Postby Bombchaser » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:35 pm

kevin trieu wrote:
Bombchaser wrote:
kevin trieu wrote:
Bombchaser wrote:
kevin trieu wrote:
Bombchaser wrote:A lenticular cloud is a warning of a coming cold front, escpecially if high clouds are increasing. However they can also form from changes in the jet stream or wind direction at high altitude. Lenticular clouds can lower onto the top of large mountains producing localized severe weather. I have had first hand experience of this. I had a lenticular form out of a perfectly sunny day. The windchill hit -35, 60+ mph winds, whiteout conditions from blowing ice and snow. This lasted for about two hours. I was wearing 6 layers of clothes, heavy mitts, and mountaineering boots. Had I left this gear and went up in light clothes I may have died. I later saw that this was produced by a cold front moving into Canada. After the lenticular dissapated it returned to sunny weather. I was caught in the lenticular at the 13,000+ foot summit. The mountain was also covered in snow and ice. Having the clothes, ability to navigate, and saftey gear kept me from ruining my trip.


The deciding factor was I had set up base camp at 11,000 feet and spent the night. Coming up from the car would have taken a half day to go just from where my car was at to where I camped. That is the difference. I had originally planned to spend the next night, but with the appearance of a lenticular I decided to pack up and head out after my summit bid.

So you didn’t go down after seeing the lenticular cloud but chose instead to wait it out?


In my case, based on my experience, I made the decision to continue. I was at about 12,000 or so when it started forming. I had looked at weather models before I left and had a good idea of where things were at. I had all of the proper gear and was not on a highly technical route. So based on my experience level, and knowledge I made the decision to continue. I had a good idea this was a localized event since it was forming from the summit outward. Now if I had been at my car, and looked up and seen this, I would have likely discontinued my attempt.


1. Your experience told you to continue higher into forming lentucular clouds?
2. What weather models were you looking at? Did the models tell that the storm was going to last for only two hours?
3. So you continued because the stakes were higher and you were closer to the summit. What's the difference between the decision to continue whether you are at the car or 200 feet from the summit? Shouldn't it be the same?


Again, this was a judgement call. I had the experience, I had the gear. The route was not technical. This is why I continued. The weather models I saw didn't show a cold front would enter this region. My experience with weather said that since there was no high clouds above the lenticular that I had plenty of time to make the summit and return. This is all based on my training and experience. If this was Mount Hood, or Shasta the bid would have been called off. If the cloud had gotten more intense, I could have hunkered down since I had the proper gear with me. Doing most of my climbing in the winter, I'm used to dealing with harsh weather conditions and all of my gear has been tested out on smaller peaks so that I know i can survive in these types of conditions. I was not just some joe blow who had never been on a mountain. with no training, and no gear. It is not uncommon to get conditions like this on a major summit. Many climbers continue to climb in this. Based on all of the circumstances and info I had, I decided it was safe enough to continue. Had there been high clouds moving in before I lost sight of the sky, I would have turned back immediately.

How do I test my gear? When the weather is forecasted to be severe, I will go out on smaller peaks to experience those conditions and try out my gear. This way when I do get caught on a major summit I don't panic and know what to do. I have a lot of small peaks I have climbed on my list. Most were done in winter like conditions. I'm also not saying I'm not above making mistakes, I'm human. I have had some close calls. But I do not go unprepared, that is the difference. I have the gear and know how to use the gear. I don't do a lot of roped climbs because I don't have a lot of experience with this. But you don't see me attempting Mount Hoods North Face either!! :wink:


So why would you not go if you were your car but continue to go higher from 12,000' given the same conditions? What are the deciding factors?
User Avatar
Bombchaser

 
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:13 am
Location: United States
Thanked: 1 time in 1 post

Postby Bombchaser » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:35 pm

Question: So why would you not go if you were your car but continue to go higher from 12,000' given the same conditions? What are the deciding factors?

Answer: The difference was I had set up base camp at 11,000 feet. It would have taken a half day to get from my car to where I camped. This is a lot more time for the weather to get a lot worse. I did plan to spend the next night at base camp but with the appearance of a lenticular cloud I decided to pack up and leave that afternoon.
Last edited by Bombchaser on Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User Avatar
Bombchaser

 
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:13 am
Location: United States
Thanked: 1 time in 1 post

Postby mrchad9 » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:36 pm

The Chief wrote:
mrchad9 wrote:Perhaps if the CHP and Siskiyou County would stop this frivolous use of helicopters ... It is the continued use of these toys in unnecessary situations that encourages inexperienced people to take these risks, so assign some of the blame where it belongs.

Frivolous...Toys....blame?
The use of the CHP AS350 is SAR SOP throughout the State of CA.

And I'm saying that SOP is partly to blame for these activities. You don't agree?

When someone reads that these two women get pulled off the mountain because the snow was deep and they might get cold, you don't think that actually encourages more people to head up with minimal experience and gear? There was no need to use that helicopter, they were not even currently in distress, they reported they might get hypothermic, not that they were. Plenty of other courses of action to take. Definitey frivolous. If the State of CA wants to overdo it on every rescue, yes, they bear some of the blame for these activities.

Chief- This statement would be more accurate...
The frivolous use of the CHP AS350 is SAR SOP throughout the State of CA.
Last edited by mrchad9 on Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4116
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1187 times in 800 posts

Postby mrchad9 » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:37 pm

You having problems posting Bombchaser?
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4116
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1187 times in 800 posts

Postby Bombchaser » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:40 pm

mrchad9 wrote:You having problems posting Bombchaser?


Affirmative!!!
User Avatar
Bombchaser

 
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:13 am
Location: United States
Thanked: 1 time in 1 post

Postby mrchad9 » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:41 pm

Bombchaser wrote:
mrchad9 wrote:You having problems posting Bombchaser?


Affirmative!!!

:lol: :lol: :lol: LOL!!!
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4116
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1187 times in 800 posts

Postby The Chief » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:42 pm

The CHP Helo responds just as does any emergency vehicle when summoned via a 911 call out. It is not nor should it be the HAC's responsibility to determine when, how or if they should respond to the call. We have already touched this issue.

Gary noted yesterday how the LACSSAR & SBCSSAR automatically respond to any mountain call with an air resource as does the CHP.
Last edited by The Chief on Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Chief

 
Thanked: time in post

Postby Bombchaser » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:43 pm

The Chief wrote:The CHP Helo responds just as does any emergency vehicle when summoned via a 911 call out. It is not nor should it be the HAC's responsibility to determine when, how or if they should respond to the call. We have already touched this issue.


Many, Many, Many times. I can bring up my school fire example again!!! :lol:
User Avatar
Bombchaser

 
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:13 am
Location: United States
Thanked: 1 time in 1 post

Postby kozman18 » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:46 pm

mrchad9 wrote:
The Chief wrote:
mrchad9 wrote:Perhaps if the CHP and Siskiyou County would stop this frivolous use of helicopters ... It is the continued use of these toys in unnecessary situations that encourages inexperienced people to take these risks, so assign some of the blame where it belongs.

Frivolous...Toys....blame?
The use of the CHP AS350 is SAR SOP throughout the State of CA.

And I'm saying that SOP is partly to blame for these activities. You don't agree?

When someone reads that these two women get pulled off the mountain because the snow was deep and they might get cold, you don't think that actually encourages more people to head up with minimal experience and gear? There was no need to use that helicopter, they were not even currently in distress, they reported they might get hypothermic, not that they were. Plenty of other courses of action to take. Definitey frivolous. If the State of CA wants to overdo it on every rescue, yes, they bear some of the blame for these activities.

Chief- This statement would be more accurate...
The frivolous use of the CHP AS350 is SAR SOP throughout the State of CA.


It might be tough for the SAR to assess the need for an evacuation when they aren't on the scene. Plus, the failure to mount a proper rescue has been the source of litgation (and this one's from Canada, not the litigation-happy USA), so there's pressure to err on the side of caution.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/06/16/9811671-sun.html
User Avatar
kozman18

 
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 3:14 am
Location: Burlington, Vermont, United States
Thanked: 23 times in 17 posts

Postby mrchad9 » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:52 pm

The Chief wrote:The CHP Helo responds just as does any emergency vehicle when summoned via a 911 call out. It is not nor should it be the HAC's responsibility to determine when, how or if they should respond to the call. We have already touched this issue.

Gary noted yesterday how the LACSSAR & SBCSSAR automatically respond to any mountain call with an air resource as does the CHP.

Again- you are only confirming that is the SOP which we all know.

And I am staying it is a bad one. It encourages this behavior. You did not address if you thought it was a good one or not, which is what I was asking. Neither did the others who replied.

I think a reasonable expectation would be to have someone assess the situation in some way. I've called 911 before, no helicopter showed up, only the police, fire, and ambulance because that's what was needed. If they aren't going to assess the situation you are telling me they will carry me down from Helen Lake if my knees are sore? Hell, that's pratically what they are doing.
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4116
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1187 times in 800 posts

Postby Bombchaser » Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:04 pm

mrchad9 wrote:
The Chief wrote:The CHP Helo responds just as does any emergency vehicle when summoned via a 911 call out. It is not nor should it be the HAC's responsibility to determine when, how or if they should respond to the call. We have already touched this issue.

Gary noted yesterday how the LACSSAR & SBCSSAR automatically respond to any mountain call with an air resource as does the CHP.

Again- you are only confirming that is the SOP which we all know.

And I am staying it is a bad one. It encourages this behavior. You did not address if you thought it was a good one or not, which is what I was asking. Neither did the others who replied.

I think a reasonable expectation would be to have someone assess the situation in some way. I've called 911 before, no helicopter showed up, only the police, fire, and ambulance because that's what was needed. If they aren't going to assess the situation you are telling me they will carry me down from Helen Lake if my knees are sore? Hell, that's pratically what they are doing.


The police, fire, and ambulance showed up? This could be considered to much. The thing is, when a call comes in, based on details given, all assets needed for that emergency role. A fire alarm at a school will have numerous fire trucks rolling until it is determined their not needed. No different on a mountain, only difference is information can be a lot harder to verify and determine what may be needed. So the call comes in for a man who has fallen on Mount Shasta and all assets needed for a major rescue are going to be dispatched. In my bomb world, when we would get a bomb call we would role with all equipment. This is because we didn't know what exactly would be needed. So we would bring everything. A car crash call will have numerous assests rolling to it as well until it can be verified their not needed. Little difficult to get an ambulance and police cars up Shasta. So air support will likely always be dispatched to assist.
User Avatar
Bombchaser

 
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:13 am
Location: United States
Thanked: 1 time in 1 post

Postby The Chief » Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:15 pm

mrchad9 wrote:I think a reasonable expectation would be to have someone assess the situation in some way.


I've called 911 before, no helicopter showed up, only the police, fire, and ambulance because that's what was needed.




What responded to your call is what the in place regional/local response protocol requires as is what responds when a SAR Unit calls for an Air Unit to assist them in getting one of their members up to the incident site ASAP in order to make an appropriate assessment of the actual situ on scene.

Come on, quit acting so....
The Chief

 
Thanked: time in post

PreviousNext

Return to News

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

© 2006-2013 SummitPost.org. All Rights Reserved.