05 June Rainier Avalanche

www.komonews.com/news/local/95695844.html

Doesn't look good, 1 climber and a skier missing. Hope its none of you lot and fingers crossed for them although not looking good.

Wow, horrible news today, with this and the Arne Backstrom tragedy.

A few more links, but not much information at this point:

seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews...683_climbers06m.html
www.thenewstribune.com/2010/06/05/121440...mber-missing-on.html
www.king5.com/news/local/Climber-missing...ainier-95694949.html
www.kirotv.com/news/23805380/detail.html

The later reports seem to say that a single climber is missing. The climber didn't register so they don't know his name yet.

Reports are that the slab avalanche on the Ingraham Glacier was 1000s of feet across. It released around 4:45 a.m., which is during twilight this time of year. That seems too early for the sun to have much effect.

Hoping for the best...

+ 1 on hoping for the best!

That seems too early for the sun to have much effect.

Looking at telemetry... was there really an 18 degree warm up between 3am and 5am at Muir? Wow.

Looking at telemetry... was there really an 18 degree warm up between 3am and 5am at Muir? Wow.

I assume this is what you're looking at:

www.nwac.us/weatherdata/campmuir/10day/

6-5-2010
          Northwest Weather and Avalanche Center
          Camp Muir, Mt Rainier National Park, Washington
          Data also courtesy Mt Rainier National Park
         
          Wind sensors unheated and may rime

            MM/DD   Hour   Temp     RH   Wind   Wind   Wind   Wind
                     PST      F      %    Min    Avg    Max    Dir
                         10100' 10100' 10100' 10100' 10100' 10100'
         

---

              6 5   2100     40     42      8     14     19    336
              6 5   2000     41     45      6     13     23    302
              6 5   1900     41     45      4     12     30    303
              6 5   1800     41     40      7     13     20      4
              6 5   1700     44     39      7     15     21     16
              6 5   1600     43     46      5     15     20     12
              6 5   1500     46     39      4      9     18    358
              6 5   1400     45     44      4      8     13    318
              6 5   1300     47     46      6     10     18     39
              6 5   1200     43     44      6     12     25     16
              6 5   1100     44     59      6     12     23     34
              6 5   1000     42     76      9     18     30     60
              6 5    900     41     79     16     30     40     51
              6 5    800     39     81     19     30     39     48
              6 5    700     38     90     18     31     42     49
              6 5    600     39     84     21     31     40     52
              6 5    500     39     78     22     31     37     49
         

---

          (some missing data for this range)
              6 5    300     21     60      3     10     23    354
              6 5    200     25     44      8     15     29    274
              6 5    100     23     61      5     12     19    262
              6 5      0     22     73      4     11     23    261
              6 4   2300     20     86      1      6     15    338
              6 4   2200     21     90      2      6     16    262

That sure looks fishy.

So I looked at the 24hr record. Now I'm confused. I always assumed that the last 24 hours of data is right at the top of this page:

www.nwac.us/weatherdata/campmuir/now/

But if you scroll up and down this page, it appears to display a whole year of data and the latest day is at the bottom. Is that right? I feel pretty stupid not noticing this before. If that's correct, here's the latest data:

6-5-2010
          Northwest Weather and Avalanche Center
          Camp Muir, Mt Rainier National Park, Washington
          Data also courtesy Mt Rainier National Park
         
          Wind sensors unheated and may rime

            MM/DD   Hour   Temp     RH   Wind   Wind   Wind   Wind
                     PST      F      %    Min    Avg    Max    Dir
                         10100' 10100' 10100' 10100' 10100' 10100'
         

---

              6 3   1500     20     75     22     35     43    228
              6 3   1600     20     90     27     34     43    229
              6 3   1700     21     97     14     27     40    229
              6 3   1800     22     97     15     24     31    244
              6 3   1900     23     98     22     42     57    243
              6 3   2000     23     98     31     43     56    238
              6 3   2100     23     98     30     39     50    242
              6 3   2200     23     98     24     31     43    200
              6 3   2300     24     98     24     30     39    200
              6 4      0     26     99     37     43     55    200
              6 4    100     26     99     42     49     55    200
              6 4    200     27     99     43     51     56    200
              6 4    300     26     99     47     53     58    200
              6 4    400     26     99     38     47     54    200
              6 4    500     26     99     31     38     43    200
              6 4    600     27     99     28     33     40    200
              6 4    700     27     99     32     37     41    200
              6 4    800     27     99     27     33     38    200
              6 4    900     28     98     18     31     39    203
              6 4   1000     28     98     23     34     47    228
              6 4   1100     28     97     24     40     55    233
              6 4   1200     28     97     17     37     51    223
              6 4   1300     29     96     14     28     44    233
              6 4   1400     29     97     12     28     43    252
              6 4   1500     28     96     16     30     48    242
              6 4   1600     27     97     15     32     51    243
              6 4   1700     25     96     15     29     45    249
              6 4   1800     22     94     11     19     33    263
              6 4   1900     21     94      3     14     27    263
              6 4   2000     21     89      3     18     40    247
              6 4   2100     21     92      3     11     26    261
              6 4   2200     21     90      2      6     16    262
              6 4   2300     20     86      1      6     15    338
              6 5      0     22     73      4     11     23    261
              6 5    100     23     61      5     12     19    262
              6 5    200     25     44      8     15     29    274
              6 5    300     21     60      3     10     23    354
              6 5    400     23     35      2      4      8      8
              6 5    500     26     57      0      2      5    360
              6 5    600     26     30      0      3      7     49
              6 5    700     31     21      1      5      8      5
              6 5    800     27     32      0     10     19    252
              6 5    900     27     32     12     16     21    259
         
                                      Page 204


          6-5-2010
          Northwest Weather and Avalanche Center
          Camp Muir, Mt Rainier National Park, Washington
          Data also courtesy Mt Rainier National Park
         
          Wind sensors unheated and may rime

            MM/DD   Hour   Temp     RH   Wind   Wind   Wind   Wind
                     PST      F      %    Min    Avg    Max    Dir
                         10100' 10100' 10100' 10100' 10100' 10100'
         

---

              6 5   1000     27     36     11     15     18    257
              6 5   1100     27     32     12     16     24    263
              6 5   1200     28     30     17     20     30    260
              6 5   1300     28     32     18     28     34    248
              6 5   1400     29     57     18     30     40    244
              6 5   1500     28     49     10     19     28    248
              6 5   1600     27     89      6     15     22    234
              6 5   1700     28     74     14     23     31    245
              6 5   1800     27     71     18     25     34    241
              6 5   1900     27     88     29     34     40    245
              6 5   2000     27     74     17     30     40    256

No huge jump here, but the temperature did fluctuate more than usual around the time of the avalanche (4:45am).

Can somebody from NWAC explain the strangeness in the 10day chart?

Can somebody from NWAC explain the strangeness in the 10day chart?

Plus, can somebody at NWAC fix the confusing layout of the "now" page:

www.nwac.us/weatherdata/campmuir/now/

Every daily record on this page is labeled with today's date: "6-5-2010".

The page contains a full year of data and there are two "6-5" records on the page. They're definitely not the same record . The one at the top is 6-5-2009, isn't it? This is super confusing.

Greetings all interested BC folks and others-

As of 0900 this morning (6-6-10), the NWAC mountain weather data displays have been repaired. Problem was automated scheduling programs overwriting last year's data. The older data files have now been archived, new data files created, and hourly information should once again be routinely available as usual.

I know it's never a good time to have weather data go down. Sorry about the brief lack of instrumentation availability, and the ensuing confusion with some of last year's data. Please also note that if you're looking at past 10-day data files...disregard data for June 4 & 5 in the 10-day NWAC data sets, as the data shown is for June 4 and 5 of 2009 (the air temperature did not spike at Camp Muir on Saturday morning).. However, the data in the NOW files should be correct.

FYI, the temps recorded at Camp Muir on Saturday morning did experience a slow rise, from the lower 20's around midnight up to the mid-upper 20's in the late morning.

Best, Mark Moore--NWAC

Hey Lowell,

Obviously, I'm not the one with an answer to your question, but I will concur that there is quite a different set of data on the NOW page and the 10-day page.

Additionally, I always look at the 10-day so I can 'review the history' and am used to the data being most recent at the top, but it should be consistent for both pages. You are not the only one to not have noticed the top to bottom, bottom to top discrepancy though.

So, maybe someone will chime in with an answer or solution.

Okay, so things are fixed, but the data for yesterday is still completely different for 6/5/2010 on the NOW and the 10-day.

And then, back to the original topic, any more information?

As of 0900 this morning (6-6-10), the NWAC mountain weather data displays have been repaired. Problem was automated scheduling programs overwriting last year's data. The older data files have now been archived, new data files created, and hourly information should once again be routinely available as usual.

Thanks Mark!

Now that the data is easier to read, the question that Holly raised is still outstanding. How do we explain the apparent 18 degree jump at Camp Muir between 300 and 500 on the morning of June 5? Is that real? The data on either side of the jump is relatively smooth. If the instruments were working correctly both before and after the jump, we have to conclude that the temperature step is genuine.

www.nwac.us/weatherdata/campmuir/10day/

  6-6-2010
          Northwest Weather and Avalanche Center
          Camp Muir, Mt Rainier National Park, Washington
          Data also courtesy Mt Rainier National Park
         
          Wind sensors unheated and may rime

            MM/DD   Hour   Temp     RH   Wind   Wind   Wind   Wind
                     PST      F      %    Min    Avg    Max    Dir
                         10100' 10100' 10100' 10100' 10100' 10100'
         

---

          (some missing data for this range)
              6 6    700     28     99     20     25     31    261
              6 6    600     28     99     23     28     33    261
              6 6    500     29     99     18     22     26    261
         

---

              6 6    400     39     48      8     15     19     16
              6 6    300     39     45      9     16     20      6
              6 6    200     40     42      7     16     24     14
              6 6    100     40     42      8     16     23     14
              6 6      0     40     40      8     14     18      8
              6 5   2300     40     42     10     15     19     24
              6 5   2200     40     42      5     11     17    352
              6 5   2100     40     42      8     14     19    336
              6 5   2000     41     45      6     13     23    302
              6 5   1900     41     45      4     12     30    303
              6 5   1800     41     40      7     13     20      4
              6 5   1700     44     39      7     15     21     16
              6 5   1600     43     46      5     15     20     12
              6 5   1500     46     39      4      9     18    358
              6 5   1400     45     44      4      8     13    318
              6 5   1300     47     46      6     10     18     39
              6 5   1200     43     44      6     12     25     16
              6 5   1100     44     59      6     12     23     34
              6 5   1000     42     76      9     18     30     60
              6 5    900     41     79     16     30     40     51
              6 5    800     39     81     19     30     39     48
              6 5    700     38     90     18     31     42     49
              6 5    600     39     84     21     31     40     52
              6 5    500     39     78     22     31     37     49
         

---

          (some missing data for this range)
              6 5    300     21     60      3     10     23    354
              6 5    200     25     44      8     15     29    274
              6 5    100     23     61      5     12     19    262
              6 5      0     22     73      4     11     23    261
              6 4   2300     20     86      1      6     15    338
              6 4   2200     21     90      2      6     16    262
              6 4   2100     21     92      3     11     26    261
              6 4   2000     21     89      3     18     40    247
              6 4   1900     21     94      3     14     27    263
              6 4   1800     22     94     11     19     33    263
              6 4   1700     25     96     15     29     45    249
              6 4   1600     27     97     15     32     51    243
              6 4   1500     28     96     16     30     48    242
              6 4   1400     29     97     12     28     43    252
              6 4   1300     29     96     14     28     44    233
              6 4   1200     28     97     17     37     51    223
              6 4   1100     28     97     24     40     55    233
              6 4   1000     28     98     23     34     47    228
              6 4    900     28     98     18     31     39    203
              6 4    800     27     99     27     33     38    200
              6 4    700     27     99     32     37     41    200
              6 4    600     27     99     28     33     40    200
              6 4    500     26     99     31     38     43    200

Here's sunrise/sunset data for June 5, from the website:

aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/RS_OneDay.php

U.S. Naval Observatory
Astronomical Applications Department

Sun and Moon Data for One Day

The following information is provided for Seattle, King County, Washington (longitude W122.3, latitude N47.6):

        Saturday
        5 June 2010           Pacific Daylight Time         

                         SUN
        Begin civil twilight       4:34 a.m.                 
        Sunrise                    5:13 a.m.                 
        Sun transit                1:08 p.m.                 
        Sunset                     9:03 p.m.                 
        End civil twilight         9:43 p.m.                 

Eighteen degrees of warming in two hours is remarkable. That could sure contribute to the avalanche trigger.

The 10day record is showing a 10-degree downward step between 400 and 500 this morning (6/6/2010). I think the temperature data from 6/5/2010 in the 10day record may be corrupted.

The 10day record is showing a 10-degree downward step between 400 and 500 this morning (6/6/2010). It seems to me that all the temperature data from 6/5/2010 in the 10day record should be suspect.

Lowell and others--
Unfortunately there is no easy way to fix the past 10-day moving data records short of nuking the entire file(s). So for now, please do not use the 10-day data to infer any temperature or other data changes in the June 4-5 time frame. for any of our stations The current data files (NOW) that only display the past 24 hours should be correct. Once again I apologize for the confusion and the data problem.

Best, Mark Moore

Thanks Mark. I was looking at all the other telemetry stations in WA and OR and noticing 10-20 degree temperature rises right about 5A. This explains that.

Thanks also for whatever light you're able to shed on this unfortunate accident. The news reports are all over the place in terms of characterizing the slide (as usual) and I'm looking forward to seeing a better summary of the facts when the time is right.

Thanks, Mark.

Speaking of avalanche activity, check out this trip report from the Chinook Pass/Naches Peak area Saturday:

www.nwhikers.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7983635

Are all the TAY Rainier regulars accounted for: Amar, Kyle etc?

Amar has been skiing in California and he also always registers when climbing solo.
It is sad news to lose anyone in the mountains when you know they are doing it because it is their passion. None the less climbing rangers have been putting in up to 20 hours straight trying to find them, an exhausting endeavor.

Kyle just dropped me a note. So he is accounted for.
I was supposed to be on the Finger, did not leave Seattle due to forecast and conditions. Hope for a positive outcome and safety for the rescue squad.

No news on the trigger?

I read elsewhere that the avalanche may have occurred because of re-freezing, which definitely can happen ... but it's very rare.

Still, a very sad outcome for the climber and their family.

In some places, especially high elevations, the pack is still very wintery. Some recent ( informal ) test profiles in the North Cascades have shown rounds to the grounds, but there are a variety of suspect regions/interfaces/small layers composed of rounds of different sizes. The larger rounds are 4-5x bigger than the smaller rounds. With the right triggers, this funky layering will produce avalanches, and the mass of the avalanche will increase with depth to weakness.

Not sure that most of these weaknesses are suitable for skier-triggering right now, except in thin spots, but the likelihood of skier-triggering and large naturals is going to increase as the top of the snowpack diminishes in the next few weeks. I bet most people here know this already, but I have to keep reminding myself that it's only just now getting to be spring at higher elevations.

Whatever the case, I am digging more test profiles now than I was during the winter.

No news on the trigger?

I read elsewhere that the avalanche may have occurred because of re-freezing, which definitely can happen ... but it's very rare.

Special avy statement was posted yesterday afternoon, although only a few more details on the incident:

www.nwac.us/forecast/avalanche/current/zone/7/
"Although only preliminary information on the recent avalanche accident on Mt Rainier has yet been received, it appears that the avalanche was a human triggered 3 to 6 ft deep hard slab, approximately 1 to 200 yards wide, and running about 1,200 vertical feet. Latest information indicates that the slide caught 11, buring or partially burying 4, one of whom remains unacccounted for at this time and is missing and presumed dead. Other climbing parties in the area were able to recover three of those who were buried or partially buried, two of whom suffered injuries necessitating airlift rescue from the site with the third able to walk out amid minor injuries."

We got a good view of the avalanche debris from the top of Little Tahoma later the same day. Though it looked recent, we didn't know exactly when it had occurred. It was certainly thought-provoking as the aspect on the Ingraham is similar to the upper Whitman Glacier. However, conditions seemed stable as we ascended -- firm snow and breakable crust with boot penetration of 1-8". Of course the slab fractured a meter down so who knows... I suspect that the steeper west aspects of Little T provide much less fetch than the summit slopes above the Ingraham resulting in less wind loading.  Regardless it is a good reminder to be careful on this cool and wet spring we are having!

Missing Mount Rainier climber identified as Olympia man

olympia.komonews.com/content/missing-mou...entified-olympia-man

For all TAYERS and others:

Please note that as of 130 PM today, with the exception of Chinook Pass and Sunrise (which rely on an as of yet to be revived phone line to Sunrise), all other 10-Day (archived) station data shown on the NWAC web site have now been corrected for the 0500, 6-5-10 to 0400, 6-6-10 time frame. We have revised the archiving methodology at NWAC so that this problem should not reappear in the future, and apologize for the resulting confusion.

However, be aware that sensors and stations may experience intermittent problems, and as a rule use common sense in applying data and always check out the parameter line near the start of the file that lists known problems with the data or sensors. Thanks for your patience...

Best, Mark Moore--NWAC

For all TAYERS and others:

Please note that as of 130 PM today, with the exception of Chinook Pass and Sunrise (which rely on an as of yet to be revived phone line to Sunrise), all other 10-Day (archived) station data shown on the NWAC web site have now been corrected  for the 0500, 6-5-10 to 0400, 6-6-10 time frame. We have revised the archiving methodology at NWAC so that this problem should not reappear in the future, and apologize for the resulting confusion.

However, be aware that sensors and stations may experience intermittent problems, and as a rule use common sense in applying data and always check out the parameter line near the start of the file that lists known problems with the data or sensors. Thanks for your patience...

Best, Mark Moore--NWAC

Thanks a bunch, Mark; we rely on these readouts daily.

FYI, some more information.

I feel sad for this young man's parents

www.kitsapsun.com/news/2010/jun/08/love-...ied/?partner=popular

FYI, some more information.

I feel sad for this young man's parents

...and for his 5-year old kid.

NWAC has posted more photos of the avalanche.  I can think of two interpretations: it could have been climber-triggered at a deficit zone, lookers right, then propagated left. I believe the route normally climbs the gut of the glacier, then traverses right onto the top of the DC. But the slide looks like it stepped down in the center of the path, and that doesn't make sense to me in terms of being triggered at thin spot, that should have ripped the deepest weak layer at that point. Alternately, maybe serac fall triggered it in the center of the path. Is there anyone who is more knowledgeable about avalanche kinetics who can comment?

On the southwest side of Baker, Tuesday 6/8, the only thing we got to move were a couple of slow, predictable loose, wet slides in the heat of the afternoon on 40+ degree slopes at ~6000'.  There was 3-4 inches of fresh windpack (probably from Monday night) that skied very nicely above 8500'.  The fresh snow felt hollow, but was shallow and below it lay a thick, bombproof crust.  Lower on the mountain, nice corn to about 6k, then mush, much of it quite sticky.  The bare patches nearer to the car skied quite well with my current wax job.

Anyone who's been higher have any conditions to report?

This is very sad. From the article, Mark sounded like a pretty amazing guy.

I've seen small slides start *much* bigger slabs lower down once they got moving and gained some mass. So the idea that this thing started on the far R at a weak spot and then entrained a much bigger slab lower down, even on lower angled maybe less loaded terrain, is very plausible. It also looks like a smaller release on the RH side of the photo might have undercut the support for larger slabs near the center of the photo, where the biggest crowns are. I have no idea if any of that made a difference in this case. But it does happen.

Regardless of how exactly this slide ran, its a terrible event. Sincere condolences to the family & Mark's son.

Outwardly, the taxonomy of avalanches is very simple: loose / slab, hard / soft, wet / dry. The reality of avalanches is that these terms are very general approximations of very complex phenomena.

To this point, in many small, dry snow avalanches, especially events with a short vertical fall, or events on a gentle slope, the slab simply disintegrates as it falls. There is no core, there is no powder cloud, and the snow grains might not even rub together enough to produce rapid freezing. This type of event, while still dangerous, is not what happened here.

Stepping down wouldn't have mattered, as the areal size of the initial fracture was almost certainly large enough to produce a large avalanche. Once flowing snow attains enough mass and velocity, its behaviour changes. This type of avalanche is referred to as a mixed-motion avalanche, AKA a "Hollywood Avalanche". These avalanches are much more diffult to reconstruct, especially in an area with a chaotic, high-altitude snowpack that overlays perennial ice.

In a mixed-motion avalanche, is is thought that the core itself slides downhill like a brick, but the fluidisation of the outer part of the core ( the air/snow mixture ) allows for strange behaviour, most of which is poorly understood. Additionally, the fluidised external layer is responsible for producing the powder cloud that gives the avalanche its "Hollywood" appearance.

Rank Speculation:

The deposit is visible all the way up to the serac, which suggests the upper part of the fracture ( on the right side of my image ) produced snow that flowed downhill and stopped immediately. Flowing snow originating in the left side of the image accelerated rapidly and entrained more snow as it traveled downhill. At some point, probably in first few seconds, the flowing snow became fluidised and then the proverbial material hit the proverbial fan.

I'm very surprised that there were 11 humans in the way of this avalanche and only a single fatality. Does anyone know if most of the climbers were caught at the edge of the slide? I can't imagine that 11 people could be hit by the front of this avalanche without at least 10 more fatalities. The forces produced at the front of this type of avalanche would be more than enough to kill most people, even if they weren't buried.

I am truly sorry for the young man and his family. This really was mostly chance and not a lot of choice.

Looking at telemetry... was there really an 18 degree warm up between 3am and 5am at Muir? Wow.

Given that the avy hit at 4:45a, I can belive it. Very odd. ???