|
|
|
|
|
|
Turns All Year Trip Reports (1) Viewing these pages constitutes your acceptance of the Terms of Use. (2) Disclaimer: the accuracy of information here is unknown, use at your own risk. (3) Trip Report monthly boards: only actual trip report starts a new thread. (4) Keep it civil and constructive - that is the norm here. |
|
|
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Oct 8th, 2011, Mt Rainier-Camp Muir Attempt-9800ft (Read 4565 times)
|
Shred13
5Member
Offline
Posts: 15
|
Headed up to Camp Muir Sat. Monring. Left Paradise parking lot around 9:45, got to Camp Muir around 2pm, back to car at 4:30. We (upupdowndowwn and Ben V)hit the weather window perfect, great hiking/skinning conditions with sun out and a slight breeze. Getting to the top around 2pm allowed for about a 1-2 inches of corn to form on a smooth base. About 2-3 min. after rode down to the base of the snowfield, clouds/fog rolled in pretty thick and could only see 100ft or see in front of you. Hope it cleared out for the rest of the people still going up to Muir. Saw about 15-20 people on the snow field. Great day to be in the mountains and to start the season. Here is a little video of the day.
http://vimeo.com/30295998
I updated/revised the title of the post to represent where we actually stopped on 10/12. Did not change first post, as everything else is explained below.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 10/12/11, 03:54 PM by Shred13 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Amar Andalkar
Member
Offline
Posts: 898
WWW
|
Headed up to Camp Muir Sat. Monring. Left Paradise parking lot around 9:45, got to Camp Muir around 2pm, back to car at 4:30. We (upupdowndowwn and Ben V)hit the weather window perfect, great hiking/skinning conditions with sun out and a slight breeze. Getting to the top around 2pm allowed for about a 1-2 inches of corn to form on a smooth base. About 2-3 min. after rode down to the base of the snowfield, clouds/fog rolled in pretty thick and could only see 100 or see in front of you. Hope it cleared out for the rest of the people still going up to Muir. Saw about 15-20 people on the snow field Great day to be in the mountains and to start to the season. Here is a little video of the day. http://vimeo.com/30295998 I hate to post something like this, but I'm in a bad mood now, so here goes . . .
I'm confused as to how the above report was possible, given that I was the first skier to reach Camp Muir that day at 2:30pm. No other tracks of any kind had reached the camp since the most recent snowfall, except for the footsteps of a couple on foot who began descending from near the hut just as I arrived. We had a pleasant chat for a bit.
While skinning up I did pass 3 boarders and 1 skier at about 9700 ft, starting their descent at 2:10pm. All four started downhill just seconds before I reached them, so I couldn't even say hi or chat with them. I was curious why they were sitting down and switching over at the single windiest spot on the entire Muir Snowfield (and starting down the only field of rough sastrugi on the entire Snowfield), instead of continuing on the last bit to Muir in much less wind and on perfectly smooth snow. Seemed very odd to me. Clearly from the photos and video, that was your group, and that of cornRIDE.
Sorry to say it, but 9700 ft is not Camp Muir. It took just over 20 minutes this day for me to skin the remaining vert to the huts at 10080 ft, so it's not even particularly close to Camp Muir.
Anyway, it was a beautiful day up there, and the skiing was smooth and nice other than the rough sastrugi from 9700-9500 ft. I'm glad you had a great day up there as did I, but it would be nice to be more accurate in your reports. If you turn around short of an objective, please say so (or even simply gloss over it and omit any mention as the other report by cornRIDE does). But claiming that you reached an objective when you did not in fact do so (even a trivially minor one like Camp Muir) is just not right.
And I very rarely correct people's spelling online, but this goes for both you and cornRIDE. Please, please, please, it's Mount RAINIER, not Rainer and not Ranier.
There, I'm done being obnoxious for now. Sorry for bringing a bit of TGR-type behavior to TAY. I hope we'll have a much more pleasant interaction the next time our paths cross.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shred13
5Member
Offline
Posts: 15
|
I hate to post something like this, but I'm in a bad mood now, so here goes . . . I'm confused as to how the above report was possible, given that I was the first skier to reach Camp Muir that day at 2:30pm. No other tracks of any kind had reached the camp since the most recent snowfall, except for the footsteps of a couple on foot who began descending from near the hut just as I arrived. We had a pleasant chat for a bit. While skinning up I did pass 3 boarders and 1 skier at about 9700 ft, starting their descent at 2:10pm. All four started downhill just seconds before I reached them, so I couldn't even say hi or chat with them. I was curious why they were sitting down and switching over at the single windiest spot on the entire Muir Snowfield (and starting down the only field of rough sastrugi on the entire Snowfield), instead of continuing on the last bit to Muir in much less wind and on perfectly smooth snow. Seemed very odd to me. Clearly from the photos and video, that was your group, and that of cornRIDE. Sorry to say it, but 9700 ft is not Camp Muir. It took just over 20 minutes this day for me to skin the remaining vert to the huts at 10080 ft, so it's not even particularly close to Camp Muir. Anyway, it was a beautiful day up there, and the skiing was smooth and nice other than the rough sastrugi from 9700-9500 ft. I'm glad you had a great day up there as did I, but it would be nice to be more accurate in your reports. If you turn around short of an objective, please say so (or even simply gloss over it and omit any mention as the other report by cornRIDE does). But claiming that you reached an objective when you did not in fact do so (even a trivially minor one like Camp Muir) is just not right. And I very rarely correct people's spelling online, but this goes for both you and cornRIDE. Please, please, please, it's Mount RAINIER, not Rainer and not Ranier. There, I'm done being obnoxious for now. Sorry for bringing a bit of TGR-type behavior to TAY. I hope we'll have a much more pleasant interaction the next time our paths cross. Amar, thanks for the kind note! You are correct that we did not make it to Camp Muir, I believe our GPS said just over 9800 feet. Let me explain why we did not skin the extra 20 min. up to the huts. About 30-45 min before we decided to descend, we watched one set of clouds/fog roll through and cover the bottom half of the snowfield. Im sure you saw the same thing! When you where watching us changing over, we spotted another band rolling in. So we decided to not go the extra 200 vert. feet, instead we got a great run in the sun. Amar, how long did the cover last that time? Any way our objective was to go out and have some fun making turns in Oct., which we accomplished. Also this was the first time on the mountain, so I think we made a wise choice to come down with good visibility. I will make sure to be more clear and have better spelling and grammar in my future post. Thanks for making a great day even better.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tOMfLOUNDER
5Member
Offline
Posts: 15
|
FWIW: Right on Amar. Shred13, seems you made good decisions based on your experience and objectives resulting in a good day on a great mountain. Lisa, guess I'm too old now, I don't get it and don't believe that will stand the test of time as a "great song".
Accuracy in posting is important if one wants credibility. There is no shame in making a decision leaning toward comfort or safety, to the contrary it is commendable. Integrity is the whole package.
All the best, tOM
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
cornRIDE
Member
Offline
Posts: 139
WWW
|
And I very rarely correct people's spelling online, but this goes for both you and cornRIDE. Please, please, please, it's Mount RAINIER, not Rainer and not Ranier.
There, I'm done being obnoxious for now. Sorry for bringing a bit of TGR-type behavior to TAY. I hope we'll have a much more pleasant interaction the next time our paths cross.
Sheesh Amar. Forgave a guye for misssspeling a werd by aksudent. Considering the word I spelled incorrectly is on the side of the beer cans I buy every weekend I have no excuse!
I understand the request for accuracy entirely- did I misslead you? I was just trying to leave a quick note about the snow quality and "omitted" any details not related to the actual conditions. everyone is allowed to have a bad day or be in a bad mood- hope today is better for you Amar!
Shred13- you made the right decision heading down in the sun considering it's your first time on the snowfield. If it were more windy, Amar is correct- that's a bad/hard place to make the transition exposed in the open. The snowfield can be dangerous despite it's mellow skiing. Amar has completed this route 100+ times and could probably ski it blindfolded.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 10/11/11, 09:47 AM by cornRIDE »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bill G
5Member
Offline
Posts: 10
|
Did I miss something? Was this a first ascent - or perhaps a first descent? I appreciate the info on the conditions on the snowfield and a good day out. Now could someone please correct the spelling on the PEAK Karl Marx!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
brownc9
Member
Offline
Posts: 139
|
I hate to post something like this, but I'm in a bad mood now, so here goes . . . I'm confused as to how the above report was possible, given that I was the first skier to reach Camp Muir that day at 2:30pm. No other tracks of any kind had reached the camp since the most recent snowfall, except for the footsteps of a couple on foot who began descending from near the hut just as I arrived. We had a pleasant chat for a bit. While skinning up I did pass 3 boarders and 1 skier at about 9700 ft, starting their descent at 2:10pm. All four started downhill just seconds before I reached them, so I couldn't even say hi or chat with them. I was curious why they were sitting down and switching over at the single windiest spot on the entire Muir Snowfield (and starting down the only field of rough sastrugi on the entire Snowfield), instead of continuing on the last bit to Muir in much less wind and on perfectly smooth snow. Seemed very odd to me. Clearly from the photos and video, that was your group, and that of cornRIDE. Sorry to say it, but 9700 ft is not Camp Muir. It took just over 20 minutes this day for me to skin the remaining vert to the huts at 10080 ft, so it's not even particularly close to Camp Muir. Anyway, it was a beautiful day up there, and the skiing was smooth and nice other than the rough sastrugi from 9700-9500 ft. I'm glad you had a great day up there as did I, but it would be nice to be more accurate in your reports. If you turn around short of an objective, please say so (or even simply gloss over it and omit any mention as the other report by cornRIDE does). But claiming that you reached an objective when you did not in fact do so (even a trivially minor one like Camp Muir) is just not right. And I very rarely correct people's spelling online, but this goes for both you and cornRIDE. Please, please, please, it's Mount RAINIER, not Rainer and not Ranier. There, I'm done being obnoxious for now. Sorry for bringing a bit of TGR-type behavior to TAY. I hope we'll have a much more pleasant interaction the next time our paths cross. Someone's got a case of the mondays. Get off the high horse.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
crystal_mt_dreamin
5Member
Offline
Posts: 33
WWW
|
Someone's got a case of the mondays. Get off the high horse.
LOL, x2. I can understand the correction on Muir given the report did say got to Camp Muir, but seems like tact got lost in translation. And complaining about grammar/spelling online on top of it seems a bit meh - but than again, I don't know I'd recognize 'correct' English online anymore, nor do I take myself and my recreational activities so seriously that I'd bother to care.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
James Wells
Member
Offline
Posts: 458
|
It appears there is a consensus that Amar sounded grumpy, and we can have some fun with that, but there are good reasons for being accurate as he says.
What comes to mind is that if people use a trip report for planning purposes and it's not quite right, it can result in a hazard. Unlikely in this case but what if there was a significant obstacle in the stretch not traversed? What if somebody said 'Well I know X Person and they took Y hours to get there so I'll plan on that", but it's wrong?
It can also cause you to make wrong decisions about partner planning. So let's say I posted a climbing trip report and said I climbed Prime Rib, so somebody else planning a trip with me assumed "well he climbed Prime Rib so he can do this other route with no problem." As it turns out, I pulled on gear to aid the crux. No shame in that but it's just a good idea to say so.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
davidG
Member
Offline
Posts: 722
|
ok, no harm, no foul, but yeah, accuracy is better than not, even when the distinction seems tiny or irrelevant. i've been guilty of a bit of carelessness before..
btw, it's good form to explain an edit wherever reasonable to do so. Continuity can get lost and comments can become confusing when the nature of an edit is not clear. same goes for administrative actions where post deletions occur after comments have been offered.
wednesdays, not as rough as mondays..
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Maybe we should ban hikers from anywhere that there is a potential threat to surface water?" [courtesy Newtrout, 2011]
|
|
|
Pandora
5Member
Offline
Posts: 39
|
HUDGE THANKS TO AMAR AND JAMES FOR POLICING TAY TRIP REPORTS SO EVERYONE'S ARMCHAIR SKIING EXPERIENCE IS THAT MUCH SAFER!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kyle Miller
Member
Offline
Posts: 531
WWW
|
Special thanks to Pandora for showing us one of the many ways that the Caps lock can effectively get a point across!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
SISU
|
|
|
VerticallyInclined
5Member
Offline
Posts: 54
|
Special thanks to Pandora for showing us one of the many ways that the Caps lock can effectively get a point across!
Correction, that's "Hudge" thanks.... Get it right there Mr.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Lowell_Skoog
Member
Offline
Posts: 1616
WWW
|
Careful, posting with the caps locked can lead to strains, sprains and other injuries, since your keyboard's DIN settings are invalid in that mode. 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Andrew Carey
Member
Offline
Posts: 1030
|
way too much time on your hands ... all of you :-)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
... want your own private skintrack? :-) better move to the yukon dude ....(B'ham Allen, 2011). ... Andy Carey, Nisqually Park, 3500 feet below Paradise
|
|
|
n16ht5
5Member
Offline
Posts: 81
|
what am I getting myself into...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
khyak
Member
Offline
Posts: 135
|
Hmmm, read the whole thread, but still need more info. WHERE does the skiable snow end. Can you ski to pebble creek? Thanks. Looking forward to the annual fall trip to Paradise for first turns of tthe new season.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Charlie Hagedorn
Member
Offline
Posts: 1132
WWW
|
WHERE does the skiable snow end. Can you ski to pebble creek?
A week or so before the storm, the route was continuous down to the base of the Pebble Creek windlips.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Shred13
5Member
Offline
Posts: 15
|
Hmmm, read the whole thread, but still need more info. WHERE does the skiable snow end. Can you ski to pebble creek? Thanks. Looking forward to the annual fall trip to Paradise for first turns of tthe new season.
We starting skinning at 7300 feet.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RandoneeRon
5Member
Offline
Posts: 23
|
Amar - as long as you are playing spelling cop, I might point out a stylistic no-no in your post. Single digit numerals are spelled out. "I did pass 3 boarders and 1 skier..." really should be written out at "I did pass three boarders and one skier".  http://www.grammarbook.com/numbers/numbers.asp
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
alpentalcorey
Member
Offline
Posts: 343
|
Thanks for that Ron, I never knew that and now hope to use it on my wife and pretend that I did. FWIW, I do correctly use "less" and "fewer", yet I often still say "got" when i should say "have".
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
rlsg
Member
Offline
Posts: 171
|
How or when is "got" to be used?
Is it o.k. to use "of" at the end of a sentence?
Amazing the things I learn serendipityiously (?) at this site!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
alpentalcorey
Member
Offline
Posts: 343
|
My understanding is that "got" is used more for obtaining like "I got it" or becoming/changing states like "I got cold/tired/etc" whereas "have" is for possession, which is where I screw it up.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
James Wells
Member
Offline
Posts: 458
|
More then 5 days later, we sure have got even Rainier on Amar's grumpy parade (attempt).
HUDGE THANKS!
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 10/14/11, 05:58 PM by James Wells »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you to our sponsors!
|
Contact turns-all-year.com
Turns All Year Trip Reports ©2001-2010 Turns All Year LLC. All Rights Reserved
The opinions expressed in posts are those of the poster and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Trip Reports administrators or Turns All Year LLC

|
Turns All Year Trip Reports | Powered by SMF 1.0.6.
© 2001-2005, Lewis Media. All Rights Reserved.
|
Page created in 1.058 seconds with 20 queries.
|