1
General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY
« Last post by GlennM on Today at 01:59:09 PM »I believe the interest in avalanches is about being caught under the crushing weight of the snow with bodily injuries and secondly, suffocation. I think more emphasis has been put on disproving that an avalanche produced enough snow to bury the tent and leaving residue around the tent site. From what we are given in photographs and rescuers eye witness testimony, the tent was not buried or knocked down as one expected in an avalanche.
For me, I think the suffocation hazzard is more to the point. Imagine up to nine people, close tiled in that tent all breathing the same air. If snow shifted, driftied or built up outside in eddy currents covering the tent, the canvas is going to make a significant airtight seal. Once someone raises an alarm, the first course of action would be to bang on the tent from the inside to knock the snow off. However, if the snow was too heavy and thick that might make things worse. What to do? Get out! Cut your way out the side or crawl out the front. Once outside, why not clear off the snow and go back in? I suspect that it was not possible owing to bad weather and immanent threat of exposure. Better to make for the woods.
For me, I think the suffocation hazzard is more to the point. Imagine up to nine people, close tiled in that tent all breathing the same air. If snow shifted, driftied or built up outside in eddy currents covering the tent, the canvas is going to make a significant airtight seal. Once someone raises an alarm, the first course of action would be to bang on the tent from the inside to knock the snow off. However, if the snow was too heavy and thick that might make things worse. What to do? Get out! Cut your way out the side or crawl out the front. Once outside, why not clear off the snow and go back in? I suspect that it was not possible owing to bad weather and immanent threat of exposure. Better to make for the woods.