It is rare that the Canadian Avalanche Centre (CAC) says “Yikes” over a new “avalanche beacon.” Lacking a Search mode, I think it’s safe to say that the “Snow Be” represents a major leap backwards in avalanche safety and awareness.
Both the Canadian Avalanche Centre and the American Institute for Avalanche Research and Education have posted on their Facebook pages concerning the Snow Be, with the CAC saying that “it’s absolutely imperative that you have both send and receive modes” and the AIARE commenting that it is “Maybe the most dangerous piece of ‘Avalanche Safety Gear’ in the world….”
Yikes! It’s marketed as “affordable mountain safety,” but it’s absolutely imperative that you have both send and receive modes.
— Canadian Avalanche Centre
A beacon without Search mode is useless for finding buried victims. It also turns you into a liability, as the beacon’s Send signal will interfere with any search in a slide zone — unless you turn it off and risk becoming a fatality yourself.
According to the company website, the “Snow Beacon” is marketed for “in-resort family skiing in the northern hemisphere conditions.” It is unclear why either the Northern Hemisphere or families would benefit from a beacon without Search mode. The Events page lists the company as appearing at the Snow Travel Expos in Melbourne and Sydney. Australia, which is located in the southern hemisphere and lacks major mountains, ski resorts, or glaciers, is not known for its research into avalanche safety.
Powered by AA batteries, the Snow-Be apparently lasts up to 200 hours. It is unclear whether 200 hours represents full signal strength. According to most major beacon manufacturers, beacon batteries should be retired at 50% capacity; below that amount weakens the range of the transmitter. According to the Snow-Beacon.com website, the Snow-Be transmits at the standard international frequency of 457KHz, but offers no details on how many antennas the beacon uses, whether it has a battery indicator, what its transmission range is, or whether it uses digital or analogue technology (or both).
The Snow Beacon website states that “The survival window for someone trapped in an avalanche is about 15 minutes.” According to a 2011 study from Simon Fraser University the average window in Canada — the Northern hemisphere the Snow Beacon is marketed for — is closer to 10 minutes. If the victim is injured, the window for successful rescue can be significantly less. A 2009 paper published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal that reviewed avalanche fatality data from 1984 through 2005 found that 25% of victims died of trauma. To put it simply, the 10 minute window is a generous estimate; injury significantly reduces one’s chances of survival.
The Snow Beacon has not gone over well in the snowsports media. The company’s initial marketing suggested “backcountry use” for the Snow-Be. Since being criticized by the Unofficial Networks blog as “the most dangerous piece of ‘avalanche safety gear’ the world has ever known,” the Snow Beacon website has changed its messaging, stating that “This is not a back-country product, it is ideal for in-resort family skiing in the northern hemisphere conditions.” Banners on the site advertise that the Snow-Be is “affordable resort-based safety for the snow loving family.”
These changes haven’t gone over well with Unofficial Networks, which detailed the “shady” changes on their blog. Changes included removing the owner/founder’s last name, changing their email address from “off-piste@snow-beacon.com” to “snow-info,” and emphasizing that the “Snow-Be is NOT a receiver and you cannot use it to track other avalanche transmitter’s signals.”
Without a Search function, the Snow Beacon assumes that searching for avalanche victims is Someone Else’s Problem (SEP) rather than the collective responsibility of those on the scene. It reinforces the misleading idea that qualified rescue personnel can be on location, pinpoint the signal, and dig out the caught party in under “15 minutes.” Even in a resort, this situation is unlikely, and products such as these arguably perpetuate a false sense of security. Likewise, products such as the Snow-Be arguably absolve travellers in avalanche terrain of a sense of self-responsibility, making it less likely that users will undertake Avalanche Safety Training in the practices of self-rescue and self-reliance.
Alex W
May 25, 2012
Well written. The points where people are now absolved of the responsibility of actually rescuing their partners, and providing a false sense of security are huge. I think both Notes From The Neve and Unofficial Networks have covered every point, and it’s good to see that everyone is giving their opinion as the uneducated may have not been alerted to the dangerous issues otherwise. The Internet saves the world again.
Stano
May 25, 2012
Good article, much better than the sensationalist piece over on the Unofficial Networks.
However, I am yet to hear a decent argument why this is “the most dangerous safety gear” out there.
I understand all your concerns about “false sense of safety” but my logic goes like this:
Scout is a transmit only device, and even have to be manual activated to send the SOS message (impossible if you are unconscious), yet it is praised as a great product.
And a simple down jacket provides a false sense of safety as well. It allows us to go to place (in cold conditions) where we probably should not be. But we feel that we have enough protection so we go.
And then a comment about your paragraph:
“A beacon without Search mode is useless for finding buried victims. It also turns you into a liability, as the beacon’s Send signal will interfere with any search in a slide zone — unless you turn it off and risk becoming a fatality yourself.”
Stano
May 25, 2012
Sorry about the unfinished comment above, mistakenly sent it in. So here is my reaction to this:
“A beacon without Search mode is useless for finding buried victims. It also turns you into a liability, as the beacon’s Send signal will interfere with any search in a slide zone — unless you turn it off and risk becoming a fatality yourself.”
Scout (or any other GPS tracking transmit-only device) without a search mode is useless.
The second sentence is also true for a normal beacon.
All products are made with a targeted market in mind, and so is this.
I actually see a bigger problem with people on the Unofficial Networks site. Lots of the people bashing the product are saying “it’s maybe suitable to tag your dog, sled or skis with, but not for people”. Are you kidding me? Dumb heads! Right there you can see the intelligence of people that are bashing it.
Companies got it long time ago that to tag anything other than a human being with a 457KHz is a deadly idea. They are working on a diff frequency to solve this now.
Anyways, I say the more people with transmitting beacons the better. And I believe that once they start going into a bigger backcountry they will upgrade cause they want to safe their friends and family.
Why not be liberal about this and stop this socialistic worrying on behalf of someone else.
tobias c. van Veen
May 26, 2012
hey Stano, thanks for your comments.
I assume when you say the “Scout” you mean the Spot. Any GPS device is not to be confused with an avalanche beacon. They are entirely different devices. The Scout sends a signal detailing last known coordinates to a GPS satellite relay which then informs rescue services of your choice and/or it updates contacts of your choice of your current position.
An avalanche beacon has no such functionality. It simply sends a pulse on the 457 bandwidth *and* should search for frequencies on that bandwidth. It only does so in a localizable area, usually 45-60m.
There is no comparison here between the Scout and an avalanche beacon in functionality, technology, or purpose. Ditto with a down jacket. A down jacket does nothing in an avalanche scenario and certainly doesn’t help rescue anyone.
You say that this sentence is true for all avalanche beacons:
“A beacon without Search mode is useless for finding buried victims. It also turns you into a liability, as the beacon’s Send signal will interfere with any search in a slide zone — unless you turn it off and risk becoming a fatality yourself.”
No, the second sentence (that you become a liability) is NOT true for most modern avalanche beacons, because:
(a) you should be in SEARCH mode, and not sending, during a rescue/search and
(b) most modern beacons, from the Ortovox S1 to the Mammut Barryvox Pulse, will automatically switch to SEND mode (from Search) after a few minutes of inactivity (these beacons have onboard motion sensors). So, if a second avalanche sweeps the rescue site and you are in Search mode, you will begin transmitting shortly.
The primary issue with the Snow-Be is that it is useless in a rescue situation. You become a liability. Your only option is to immediately leave the area, as otherwise you become either a hindrance (if your beacon is left on and transmitting) or a potential fatality (and thus a dangerous liability for other rescuers).
As for your last few comments, I tend to disagree. The more people with transmitting beacons is not better — not when they believe that some kind of Team America will come in and save them; not when the majority of the public will continue to confuse localized avalanche transmitters with GPS devices, as you have done. In such cases, crippled technology combined with blind ignorance will result in further accidents and dangerous situations for rescuers.
Stano
May 27, 2012
Hello Tobias,
Thanks for your reply. And yes, I meant Spot not Scout
Since I believe we are both smart enough to have lots of good arguments on both sides but simply are arguing from different perspectives this could go on for ever. So I “cease fire” but will gladly read your reply to my following comment
I believe you misread or misunderstood my comments:
You are mistaken that I (am) confused (with) the two technologies – GPS tracking and avalanche local search. I know very well how avalanche beacons work (had an avalanche gear store for couple years) and enough about the GPS tracking/rescue devices to know the difference.
Also, I never suggested that the two technologies are interchangeable which from your comment looks like you think I do think so, hence, you are trying to portrait I am confusing the two technologies.
What I am simply doing is making a comparison between two devices/technologies that are meant to save lives because the main argument being made about the Snow-Be is that it gives false sense of security. So I am drawing a comparison how other technologies (including a down jacket) are doing the same.
Of course, we can debate to which degree they are doing the same but that would be pointless as we all have different risk tolerance, sense of security, feelings… As soon as you tell 99% of population that you are going backcountry skiing they think that you are complete idiot and greatly irresponsible life-gambling person. Do you feel that way about yourself? I doubt, and we both know the reasons.
Also, I never said a down jacket helps with an avalanche rescue as you are describing: “A down jacket does nothing in an avalanche scenario and certainly doesn’t help rescue anyone.” This is debatable since I believe it is better be buried with more clothes on that just a soft-shell but that is not the point. Point is, I believe that a down jacket paints a good picture about false sense of security. Nothing more.
Now to your original statement that I commented on and you commented on that, regarding the a beacon being useless without search mode and becoming a liability.
Again, I absolutely know how beacons work and what should be done if an avalanche occurs. But again, I am coming from a bigger picture than just bashing a product for not heaving a certain feature:
In every industry or business products are created with certain targeted audience in mind. They are trying to address needs of certain groups of end customers. Company creates a product based on their research/believe/demand, goes out with it and tries to sell it. Market chooses by purchasing or not.
From what I read and understand the Snow-Be “was developed” (in quotes because not much development was needed) with SKI RESORT people in mind.
So when you say that during and avalanche scenario you should be “a) in a search mode or b) leave the scene asap if you have no search mode” you are completely right. But just imagine an avi scene at a resort (or just off bounds) right now with “no beacons” VS “all people have a Snow-Be”. I am not going to do also VS “all people have a normal beacon” because we know they can have already but don’t (price, ignorance…???)
So when NO people have beacons and a person is buried they all ski by, perhaps stop, and they are quickly send away as they are becoming a liability.
Same thing when ALL people have the Be. As rescuers are searching for the victim because it at least has a Snow-Be, all people are skiing by, perhaps some stop (and interfere with the searching beacons), they are quickly sent away as they are becoming a liability.
No difference EXCEPT that if you manage to reasonably secure the area from the “interfering” public you have much higher chance of rescuing this person.
“IF ALL people had normal beacons” is a dream scenario and is an IF only, which could have happened already.
I agree on disagreeing
)
Doug
June 10, 2012
Thanks for spreading the good word Tobias. He has now updated his website to state that the u(sless)nit is an “affordable multi-burial training tool.”
more rotten than a summer snowpack.