Login
Username:
Password:
You are NOT Logged in.
Chat about all aspects of snowsports, backcountry, climbing and mountaineering.
Goto Thread: PreviousNext
Goto: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
alan


Posts: 8956
Joined: Nov 1994
Last Visited: 00:58
20th Jun 2013
What's this?What's this?What's this?
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 18.41hrs on Sun 13 May 12
[www.geograph.org.uk]

Linked photo is dated as 1977. It would be a reasonable assumption that people are standing about in the vicinity of the top of the Cas Tow, the line of the 105 road can be just made out, suggests the top is at current location?

alan


Posts: 8956
Joined: Nov 1994
Last Visited: 00:58
20th Jun 2013
What's this?What's this?What's this?
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 18.47hrs on Sun 13 May 12
[www.geograph.org.uk]

Finally found one looking uphill, again dated 1977, so providing the date is correct then if the top of the tow was taken out in 1978 it was at the present location.

HMF


Posts: 99
Joined: Dec 2009
Last Visited: 22:10
20th Jun 2012
What's this?What's this?What's this?
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 21.22hrs on Sun 13 May 12
Alan, was there not an extra tower on the upper section of the tow many years ago about level with switchback on the 105. I'm sure the concrete pad is still there. It's almost in the vicinity of where you cut back across the tow path after coming down the man made bowl below the get off ramp.
Complex I know.

George.

WindyMiller


Posts: 54
Joined: Sep 2010
Last Visited: 18:49
19th Jun 2013
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 21.50hrs on Sun 13 May 12
That's very interesting Alan. I do remember around 77/78 the Cas being closed due to the damage and the line having to be shortened. One of the arguments at the time for shortening it was the unload station used to be in an area where the snow was not reliable and be less prone to avalanche damage. Not sure if it was only a temporary measure to get it going for the rest of the season. The pictures do seem to show the end in roughly the same place but such a long time ago!

Going off topic even more, can anyone remember the lift that used to go up the left of the Cas looking up the hill, on to the coronation wall? You can still make out the old line where the boulders were cleared. In the last picture in Alans link it would be where the small speck of a person in red is on the left hand side of the person in blue in the fore ground. I have mentioned this a number of times to some of the older regulars and get the usual, oh yes I remember something there but no one remembers its name. Was it lift number two? this would have been before 77. Was it a wooden A-Frame lift? Did the original Cas take a dog leg up here, was it this that got wiped out? Anyone remember?

alan


Posts: 8956
Joined: Nov 1994
Last Visited: 00:58
20th Jun 2013
What's this?What's this?What's this?
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 22.11hrs on Sun 13 May 12
Dr Adam Watson has sent me this photo showing earth works under the bullwheel of Coire Cas, photo taken in August 1981.

 


George, yes know the concrete you mean, it's placement does seem to suggest a tower base?




Edited 2 times. Last edit at 22.14hrs Sun 13 May 12 by alan.

Attachments: cas-off-ramp-81.jpg (69kB)  
Hipennine


Posts: 876
Joined: Dec 2005
Last Visited: 17:37
19th Jun 2013
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 09.01hrs on Mon 14 May 12
Wasn't the '81 remodelling done because it was changed to an unmanned top station ?

I do remeber that an avi did hit the top station of the cas in the 70's, however. I'm fairley sure that there was some national media coverage.

DonaldM


Posts: 492
Joined: Jan 2009
Last Visited: 10:43
17th Jun 2013
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 09.25hrs on Mon 14 May 12
daveski Wrote:
DonaldM Wrote:
cammyammy Wrote:
Sadly that is unlikely to become reality; lots of hoops CML would have to jump through first all which cost lots of £££. However it is their responsability to create a safe enviroment for their punters so it is arguably it is a cost they need to consider. Since it is uncommon to have such a severe avalanche threat perhaps they should consider contracting some experts to come up like they did in previous years.

I do wonder about you sometimes Cammy.... I don't agree that it's CML's responsibility to create a "safe" environment. They can't control the weather, wind and what people do. Skiing and boarding can be dangerous. They can only go as far as is reasonable. There is nothing to stop someone skinning up and then heading down the same line, and there never should be.

Good decisions must be based on a sound understanding of the factors at work, not an expectation that someone is looking after you.

-----------------------------------------------------------
For campervan hire in Scotland visit - Bhanaichean Campachaidh ann an Alba
Unfortunately we live in a world with a Health and Safety Executive - they can review serious accidents and have the powers to close lifts. Based on this and yesterdays incident I think the Ski Patrol had to be seen to step up their response and take a stonger line just in case something more serious happened.

Now if someone had been caught and buried that required resue and recovery that would put a huge strain on the staff - would lifts have to close on the day to support this? How more pissed folk would there be then




That is a different subject in my view. The ski area has a responsibility to ensure a safe experience within the factors they control. They don't control the weather or the decisions of others. If someone had decided to go up the hill yesterday when the ski area was closed (meaning the uplift not working) then they should and do have that choice. They must make that choice on a sound understanding though.

If someone is avalanched and injured or killed the fact that they used a lift to access that terrain is irrelevant. It might be that they access Jacobs Ladder by using a lift some of the way.

The issue is that CML are responsible for assessing in bounds areas, not the whole area.

-----------------------------------------------------------
For campervan hire in Scotland visit [www.albacampervans.com] - Bhanaichean Campachaidh ann an Alba

jabuzzard


Posts: 428
Joined: Jan 2010
Last Visited: 16:53
19th Jun 2013
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 09.41hrs on Mon 14 May 12
daveski Wrote:
They used to have an explosive store andSki Patrol were trained in the use. Sadly cost constraints prevented the replacement being included in the redevelopment


Perhaps rather than using explosives Cairngorm and other Scottish resorts could consider the installation of some permanent fuel air remote explosive devices in key areas. Basically a mix of propane and air is ignited given an explosion to trigger the avalanche. It is all set of remotely so maximum staff safety and no explosives to deal with.

[tas.groupemnd.com]

You see them all over in the Alps.

geeo


Posts: 354
Joined: Sep 2006
Last Visited: 23:56
18th Jun 2013
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 09.45hrs on Mon 14 May 12
they totally control where people can ski and cant that's the point, in bounds areas can easily be effected by out of bounds are you suggesting as long as it's safe to the ropes of the area their job is done!
clearly they are responsible for the safety of the skiiers they invite to the hill be that from avalanches from out of bounds areas into in bounds or just marking the burn as a hazard on an open run, not got anything to do whether thay use the lifts or not.


DonaldM Wrote:
daveski Wrote:
DonaldM Wrote:
cammyammy Wrote:
Sadly that is unlikely to become reality; lots of hoops CML would have to jump through first all which cost lots of £££. However it is their responsability to create a safe enviroment for their punters so it is arguably it is a cost they need to consider. Since it is uncommon to have such a severe avalanche threat perhaps they should consider contracting some experts to come up like they did in previous years.

I do wonder about you sometimes Cammy.... I don't agree that it's CML's responsibility to create a "safe" environment. They can't control the weather, wind and what people do. Skiing and boarding can be dangerous. They can only go as far as is reasonable. There is nothing to stop someone skinning up and then heading down the same line, and there never should be.

Good decisions must be based on a sound understanding of the factors at work, not an expectation that someone is looking after you.

-----------------------------------------------------------
For campervan hire in Scotland visit - Bhanaichean Campachaidh ann an Alba
Unfortunately we live in a world with a Health and Safety Executive - they can review serious accidents and have the powers to close lifts. Based on this and yesterdays incident I think the Ski Patrol had to be seen to step up their response and take a stonger line just in case something more serious happened.

Now if someone had been caught and buried that required resue and recovery that would put a huge strain on the staff - would lifts have to close on the day to support this? How more pissed folk would there be then




That is a different subject in my view. The ski area has a responsibility to ensure a safe experience within the factors they control. They don't control the weather or the decisions of others. If someone had decided to go up the hill yesterday when the ski area was closed (meaning the uplift not working) then they should and do have that choice. They must make that choice on a sound understanding though.

If someone is avalanched and injured or killed the fact that they used a lift to access that terrain is irrelevant. It might be that they access Jacobs Ladder by using a lift some of the way.

The issue is that CML are responsible for assessing in bounds areas, not the whole area.

-----------------------------------------------------------
For campervan hire in Scotland visit - Bhanaichean Campachaidh ann an Alba


DonaldM


Posts: 492
Joined: Jan 2009
Last Visited: 10:43
17th Jun 2013
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 12.29hrs on Mon 14 May 12
They don't control where people can or can't go. This is subject to access laws. I I want to skin up to 1141 and ski the Cas headwall I can do so regardless of what CML says. They can of course take my ticket off me if I have one and strongly advise me not to ski certain lines but they can't stop me. CML aren't responsible for my actions.

Likewise, the Coire Cas car park is used by many to access areas far from the ski area. If I ski under the ropes and then head down Coire Raibeart it's not CML's fault if I injure myself or otherwise. They don't have a responsibility outside the ski area other than to say "we advise you not to ski place X".

I think we are talking about slightly different topics here.

-----------------------------------------------------------
For campervan hire in Scotland visit [www.albacampervans.com] - Bhanaichean Campachaidh ann an Alba

geeo


Posts: 354
Joined: Sep 2006
Last Visited: 23:56
18th Jun 2013
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 13.12hrs on Mon 14 May 12
thx i know about the access laws , Cammy said it was up to them to make a safe enviroment for their "punters" you disagreed, their punters are not tourers no one ever said people couldn't/shouldn't ski it, they control their "punters" and where they go, safe or unsafe areas.

Sunshine


Posts: 101
Joined: Jan 2006
Last Visited: 19:29
27th May 2013
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 14.05hrs on Mon 14 May 12
Whilst it is good practice to make the ski area as safe as possible I do not believe that CML has any responsibility to people leaving the Ptarmigan station. People are responsible for their own actions on the hill. Many skiers are injured annually after leaving the Ptarmigan but that is an acceptable risk.

To emphasise that CML has no responsibility, they open the Ptarmigan Station for visitors at potentially the most dangerous time of the year and stop them carrying the appropriate safety equipment.
Using the logic of some of these comments it could be said that Stagecoach has some responsibility for dropping passengers in a hostile area. Of course, that would be ridiculous


daveski


Posts: 1325
Joined: Jan 2008
Last Visited: 23:30
19th Jun 2013
What's this?What's this?What's this?
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 14.16hrs on Mon 14 May 12
Sunshine: Surprisingly I think you will find that Stagecoach along with local authorities and a numebr of different bodies do have a level of responsibility regarding bus stops.

DonaldM: In principle I agree with but you there is point, you as an indivudaul also have a reposnsibility, I dont for a minute class you as being irresponsible and we all recognise a level of risk with sport as do volunteer services like MRT.

An indiviual actions can impact otherers - by ignoring warnings, advice etc and the worse happens and the individual needs rescued/recoverd the actions of the could be reclessly endagering the lives of others.


WindyMiller


Posts: 54
Joined: Sep 2010
Last Visited: 18:49
19th Jun 2013
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 14.36hrs on Mon 14 May 12
I am not so concerned about people going off and doing their own thing, that's up to them and they are free to do so, I don't think anyone would disagree with that, especial well trained and equipped people.

What the company has to be careful about is people in the Coronation Wall, Head Wall Fiacaill Ridge area. There is evidence of slips in these area causing damage to the lift equipment and I would hate to think what would happen if a slip hit the Cas when it was fully loaded with people. Forget the safety of the person causing the slip, think about the innocent others and damage to the infrastructure. If you want to go and play in these conditions go on, have some fun, but do it away from the areas that are known to have caused issues. The Cairngorm is a big place, room for everyone.

Interesting article here, a bit old but relevant.It mentions the Cas in 78

[www.igsoc.org:8080]

and here

[www.mountain-clients.org.uk]

look at the avalanche paragraph, a sobering list.

All the patrol can do is ask people not to ski in the danger area and if folks ignore the only power they have is to remove the ski pass, they cant physical restrain you. Remember the pass belongs to the company at all times, you pay for the privilege to use it and the privilege can be rescinded if you do not follow their wishes. Its the only leverage they have over us. The patrol are nice people, talk to them, they don't want to take action on people, its a very last resort, they are trying to look after the majority.

Hipennine


Posts: 876
Joined: Dec 2005
Last Visited: 17:37
19th Jun 2013
Re: CairnGorm Mtn (Non Conditions Discussion)
Date Posted: 14.38hrs on Mon 14 May 12
daveski Wrote:
Sunshine: Surprisingly I think you will find that Stagecoach along with local authorities and a numebr of different bodies do have a level of responsibility regarding bus stops.

DonaldM: In principle I agree with but you there is point, you as an indivudaul also have a reposnsibility, I dont for a minute class you as being irresponsible and we all recognise a level of risk with sport as do volunteer services like MRT.

An indiviual actions can impact otherers - by ignoring warnings, advice etc and the worse happens and the individual needs rescued/recoverd the actions of the could be reclessly endagering the lives of others.


Furthermore, various laws are "catch alls" for when individuals put others at risk or disrupt lawful activity (eg Breach of the Peace, etc.), and arguably the Ski Patrol would be entitled to make a citizens arrest of anybody who is endangering the safe operation of the ski area, and those people using it. Criminal law will take precedence over civil laws concerning rights of access.

Your Name: 
Your Email: 
Subject: