Lost Hiker on Mt Lafayette - FOUND!

[DougG]

And at least one not-so-good decision...

The worst decision being the choice of hiking above treeline during forecasted weather that is truly deadly.
Experience, expertise, gear, etc. had little to do with this guy surviving. I believe this hike was reckless and the rescue should be paid for accordingly. This party was not overtaken by bad weather. They knowingly stuck their heads into the lions mouth and lived thanks to luck and many dedicated SAR folks.

 

[dvbl]

Are we really gonna make lame jokes (especially the same joke repeated in consecutive posts) about a situation where a kid could potentially lose some toes? We got the Owl's Head joke the first time. Once was more than enough.

 

[Zimmer]

... And then bagged Owl's Head if he was a list person.

-Dr. Wu

*Snort*

 

[Whiteman]

Map and Compass

I'm with MadRiver on the map and compass. Jacket pocket is fine for the map, compass is in a litle pocket attached to the pack strap for easy access.

As I was thinking of this fellow over the weekend, it seems that in such lousy weather one would be best off with some sort of wrist compass (like this), or maybe something that could velcro to the back of your glove, for really quick and easy access.

And I go back to my tired old song on radios: No problem getting coverage for your ham radio up on Lafayette. You can see the repeater on Cannon, and you would easily hit it from the wrong side of the mountain. I think it is great survival gear and well worth the weight.

 

[dr_wu002]

Are we really gonna make lame jokes (especially the same joke repeated in consecutive posts) about a situation where a kid could potentially lose some toes? We got the Owl's Head joke the first time. Once was more than enough.

Then he could have done Bondcliff! hardy Har Har!

-Dr. Wu

 

[DougPaul]

The worst decision being the choice of hiking above treeline during forecasted weather that is truly deadly.

IMO, depends on the skills and experience of the hiker. There are people who can handle these conditions with minimal risk.

Doug

 

[w7xman]

IMO, depends on the skills and experience of the hiker. There are people who can handle these conditions with minimal risk.

Doug

Respectfully disagree...There is NOONE who can successfully hike any distance in a fully exposed 100mph sustained wind at this low altitude.

The force is unbelievable, and absolutely unmanageable. Hurricane force with gusts to 100mph ... sure if prepared/experienced/equippted/etc, but the force more than doubles from 75 to 100mph sustained.

Additionally, at 100 sustained you get gusts to 120, when the force goes up by 50% again. Higher elevation mountains, maybe, the lower air density decreases the force. But 100mph sustained at 5000ft with a pack and appropriate gear - cannot be done.

I'm sure this will stir responses of "I've done it," but either the route was not exposed, or the windspeed was grossly overestimated.

And as a side note, I hate the word can't.

As a last note: A 5/8 inch stainless steel bolt was sheared/snapped off in the 110mph sustained winds at the Observatory...the researcher couldn't believe it...but that's the kind of force we're dealing with...

 

[dave.m]

Regarding decisions.... I generally believe the most important decision on any trip is the go/no-go decision at the trailhead; especially in group settings. A whole series of group and personal dynamics is kicked loose as soon as you boot up and step onto the trail. Some of the hardest interpersonal "issues" I've had have been around pulling the plug (or not) on trips. Doug, I can't imagine anybody being able to function up there in those conditions with "minimal risk". I'm reminded of the hardships faced by Wilcox and company when pulling Tinkham's body off of Jefferson and of those faced by the resuers who located the body of the guy who died on the Twinway a few years back. I would think that there are a handful of elite climbers in this region have the skills to survive up there in those conditions, but it wouldn't be with minimal risk.

Regarding compasses... For above treeline travel, I keep mine in an outer parka pocket and secured to a zipper pull by a cord for easy access to keep it from blowing off. Taping paper to the back with escape headings is not a bad idea. In all seriousness, it would make sense to me to secure a compass to the outside of a mitten gauntlet.

 

[DougPaul]

Respectfully disagree...There is NOONE who can successfully hike any distance in a fully exposed 100mph sustained wind at this low altitude.

The force is unbelievable, and absolutely unmanageable. Hurricane force with gusts to 100mph ... sure if prepared/experienced/equippted/etc, but the force more than doubles from 75 to 100mph sustained.

These numbers are for Mt Washington, not Franconia Ridge. They are also measured well above the surface (~30ft, IIRC).

A nit on your aerodyamics: dynamic pressure is proportional to the square of the wind speed: 75->100mph, force x1.77

Doug

 

[DougPaul]

As an engineer, this statement has little meaning in this context unless I knew what it was attached to. What was the bolt supposed to do? Did it fail in shear or tension. I'll assume it didn't fail in compression.

Also, was the bolt fatigued or corroded?

Doug

 

[w7xman]

As an engineer, this statement has little meaning in this context unless I knew what it was attached to. What was the bolt supposed to do? Did it fail in shear or tension. I'll assume it didn't fail in compression.

Keith

I'll get a picture up later. It was attached to a 1 foot brass an fiberglass GPS dome, and was the point of fastening.

It definately wasn't a clean shear, lots of roughness/crystalization at the break point. I think it succame to the combination of cold/wind/fatigue, but the fact is still impressive no matter how you look at it.

Edit: Dome is in the background of this pic. I'll post a pic of the bolt later...
http://www.mountwashington.org/weather/comments/2006/072210-lg.jpg

 

[w7xman]

These numbers are for Mt Washington, not Franconia Ridge. They are also measured well above the surface (~30ft, IIRC).

The forecast MWO produces is for above treeline White Mountain Peaks. True Washington's winds are typically higher than the surrounding region's peaks, and the pitot is on a 10M tower, but it was a well forecast bad day. And my point stands that a 100mph sustained wind is not hikable, which I realize wasn't exactly what you implied, I just wanted to make a point on the strength of the winds predicted...

A nit on your aerodyamics: dynamic pressure is proportional to the square of the wind speed: 75->100mph, force x1.77

Doug

Correct. I just looked at our curve and did a rough extimate by eye.

But your math is correct. 1.77 <-- 2.01 but it's still a much larger increase than many realize when 'merely' increasing winds 25 mph. Especially considering that many of the hikers here have felt how strong 75 is...

 

[DougPaul]

The forecast MWO produces is for above treeline White Mountain Peaks. True Washington's winds are typically higher than the surrounding region's peaks, and the pitot is on a 10M tower, but it was a well forecast bad day.

I was working from the hourly reports for KMWN, not the forecast. The max sustainded wind speed was 92 kts and the max gust was 97 kts. Most of the speeds during the day were in the 70s and 80s. And as you noted, wind speeds elsewhere are usually lower.

And my point stands that a 100mph sustained wind is not hikable.

Perhaps, but those were not the conditions on the ridge. IMO, some of the world class climbers (frequently professionals and sometimes found in such places as 8000M peaks) would be able to function in the conditions found on Franconia Ridge that day.

Approx dynamic pressures at an altitude of 5K ft:
97 kts ... 28 lbs/sq-ft
90 kts ... 24 lbs/sq-ft
80 kts ... 19 lbs/sq-ft
70 kts ... 14 lbs/sq-ft
60 kts ... 11 lbs/sq-ft
50 kts ..... 7 lbs/sq-ft
(edit: table corrected)

(dynamic_pressure * effective_area = wind_force)

In any case, I'm sure it was no picnic up there.

Doug

 

[w7xman]

Impressive quick math. Peak (gust only) on KMWN was 105kts. Can you post what that was, just for reference? My math is tired today...

31 pounds of force per square foot sounds easy, but considering that the average bundled human is about a sqare yard +/- pack = 31lbs/foot^2 x 9 feet^2 = 279 pounds pushing you. That's alot!

Results may vary. My math was easier!

This almost deserves it's own thread!

Thanks...
w7x

I was working from the hourly reports for KMWN, not the forecast. The max sustainded wind speed was 92 kts and the max gust was 97 kts. Most of the speeds during the day were in the 70s and 80s. And as you noted, wind speeds elsewhere are usually lower.


Approx dynamic pressures at an altitude of 5K ft:
97 kts ... 31 lbs/sq-ft
90 kts ... 27 lbs/sq-ft
80 kts ... 21 lbs/sq-ft
70 kts ... 16 lbs/sq-ft
60 kts ... 12 lbs/sq-ft
50 kts ..... 8 lbs/sq-ft

(dynamic_pressure * effective_area = wind_force)

In any case, I'm sure it was no picnic up there.

Doug

 

[Mike P.]

To be unscientific, the weather sucked Saturday above treeline. Even if the winds were 80% of what they had at MWO, it still sucked. (There is also some people who feel the MWO is no longer at an optimum location for wind velocity since it moved into the Sherman Adams Building. Other places may get higher winds, Edmands & Sphinx col or just the western side of the summit)

Visibility must have been a little better than nil above treeline at best. Lafayette tends to attract people who want above treeline hiking & think, it's not a Presidential therefore it's safer. The accidents & rescues in the past few years have been as frequent or more so as people underestimate the peak.

IMO a day like last Saturday is best spent in the trees or on summits with minimal exposure like Liberty, Garfield (although the wind direction on Garfield might have pushed you off the summit) Jackson, Pierce, Moriah or Middle Carter (wooded summit but exposed near by)

Unlike Little Haystack which is narrow & not far from the trees either on F-Ridge Trail or Falling Waters, Lafayette's summit is much broader, (except when compared to the Presidentials). The area above treeline is fairly large & with the exception of the signs & the foundation which in winter may not be all that significant a feature the summit does not have many clear definition (as compared to say the summit block on Liberty Or even Osceola - you won't walk the wrong way there very far) If you are going up Lafayette in bad weather, the turnaround point needs to be the Hut or at the worst at treeline above the hut.

In my case, the map is in the pack in a zip-lock bag pre-folded to the trails & immediate area. (As the WMG guide says -probably not a quote - a blizzard is no time to take out your map & start unfolding it)

 

[funkyfreddy]

Going out in light of this forecast is not a smart decision. Thankfully he made it, but you can't overlook the risk he put the SAR folks under.

I agree..... some days it's better to stay off the mountains and explore the valleys instead. I'm also glad he made it out!

 

[DougPaul]

Impressive quick math. Peak (gust only) on KMWN was 105kts. Can you post what that was, just for reference? My math is tired today...

My math was easy too... (except I made an error)
Rules of thumb:
* 17kts gives a dynamic pressure of 1 lb/sq-ft at sea level
- dyn pres is proportional to the square of the wind speed
* density of air at 5Kft is about .85 of that at sea level
- dyn pres is proportional to the density of air

You can get the density at altitudes from http://www.digitaldutch.com/atmoscalc/

(My error was remembering 16 kts--I just recalculated to get the correct number. The old pressures were 13% high.)

So the table should be:
Approx dynamic pressures at an altitude of 5K ft:
105 kts .. 32 kbs.sq-ft
97 kts ... 28 lbs/sq-ft
90 kts ... 24 lbs/sq-ft
80 kts ... 19 lbs/sq-ft
70 kts ... 14 lbs/sq-ft
60 kts ... 11 lbs/sq-ft
50 kts ..... 7 lbs/sq-ft

In case anyone cares:
dyn_pres = .5 * rho * v**2
... where
... dyn_pres = dynamic pressure in lbs/sq-ft
... rho = density of air = .0024 slugs/cu-ft at sea level
... v = wind velocity in ft/sec
force = dyn_pres * effective_flat_plate_area
... where
... effective_flat_plate_area = real_area * coefficient_of_drag

31 pounds of force per square foot sounds easy, but considering that the average bundled human is about a sqare yard +/- pack = 31lbs/foot^2 x 9 feet^2 = 279 pounds pushing you. That's alot!

The above assumes that the frontal geometric area is close to the effective flat-plate area. (A car with a frontal area of 30 sq-ft and a coeficient of drag of .2 would have an effective area of 6 sq-ft.) Furthermore, a human will be down in the boundary layer which will subject him to a lower wind speed. My guess is that the actual force will be less than 279 lbs.

Doug

 

[DougPaul]

Peak (gust only) on KMWN was 105kts.

Out of curiosity, why isn't this number posted in the hourly reports?

One version of the hourly reports for 20 Jan: http://www.wunderground.com/history...tml?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA
(except it gives wind speeds in mph)

Or the way I usually get it (last 24 hrs): http://vortex.plymouth.edu/cgi-bin/gen_statlog.cgi?ident=kmwn&pl=none&cu=la
(times in UTC)

Peak speed = 111.6 mph = 97 kts
highest avg = 105.9 mph = 92 kts

 

[bobandgeri]

A friend who participated in the search on Sunday relayed the following information to us tonight.

The hiker had a -30 degree bag with him which most likely saved his life - he was wearing 3 season hiking boots - he was found in a drainage area over by the 13 falls tent site.

 

[w7xman]

Out of curiosity, why isn't this number posted in the hourly reports?

One version of the hourly reports for 20 Jan: http://www.wunderground.com/history...tml?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA
(except it gives wind speeds in mph)

Or the way I usually get it (last 24 hrs): http://vortex.plymouth.edu/cgi-bin/gen_statlog.cgi?ident=kmwn&pl=none&cu=la
(times in UTC)

Peak speed = 111.6 mph = 97 kts
highest avg = 105.9 mph = 92 kts

The METAR observations reported by stations are a snapshot at the time of observation, defined as two minutes. So the average sustained coded wind is a two minute average leading up to the time of observation. Gusts are defined as the 10 minute peak wind, leading up to the time of observation. Unfortunately, most of the hour is missed by standard observations.

There are two places MWO publishes their peak wind...First off, in the remarks section of the raw metars:
METAR KMWN 202249Z 32092G97KT 1/16SM BLSN FZFG VV000 M29/M29 RMK PK WND 310105/37 VRY LGT ICG

In this case the direction is 310. The peak wind is 105 kts. And the time was 37 past the hour (22Z).

Most public decoders don't decode remarks, so Wunderground and PSU decode don't show the true peaks, or true hourly averages. Here's a site that gives it to you Raw:
http://www.uswx.com/us/stn/?code=c&n=300&stn=KMWN

Easier though, the MWO website has a link to their 'monthly F6 data', which is their climate record.

http://www.mountwashington.org/weather/f6/2007/01.pdf