Remote skiing: also bring snowshoes?

[--M.]

I coulda hijacked another thread, but this is probably more a propos.

I have an annual trip this weekend, skiing in the Adirondack high peaks.

Past trips have included getting to Indian Pass from the south, backpacking to the far side of Newcomb Lake (past the great camp) and skiing up into Avalanche pass to the lakes and the height-of-land. I've also skied (solo) the Wildcat Valley Trail (up the chair lift and down the back) and the bottom two-thirds of Chocorua's Champney Falls trail. Every time, I brought snowshoes; sometimes 'cause I knew I'd need them (like Chocorua, where I also used microspikes and crampons as well); other times, just as a safety measure (Wildcat and all the ADK trips).

This time, we want to push through down to the Loj.

I'll have skins, and am considering not bringing the snowshoes. This would be the first time I didn't.

Is your reaction
=="Well duh, why would you bring all that extra weight when you have skis and skins?" ... or is it
=="No, if you break a ski, you'll need another way out of there"?

So, to those who have skied this route, or through or around the Pemi, or those who have skied anywhere at least several miles remote from the road, did you also bring snowshoes, either for specific bits of terrain you knew you'd need them for, or just as back-up? If you didn't, were there times when you wished you had done so? Would you dump the weight and bulk of a pair of 30-inch Lightning Ascents if you could?

Have you skied this particular route? Specific thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks,

--Mike.

 

[dug]

"Depends"

My experience with skiing in the ADKs was limited to doing Marcy, and we did not bring snowshoes. I have done a few others in NH (Garfield, Moosilauke for example) where I didn't. I did when we skiied in the Kilkenny, and Owl's Head.

My determining factor was whether I thought I'd be breaking trail.

 

[weatherman]

Actually that's a really good question. I used to when I lived in the NE, for two reasons: 1)I like to poke around places that skis would ordinarily get stuck; and 2) as insurance- I am a so-so skier but can go ANYWHERE on snowshoes that does not require full crampons. Now that I am in CO, where it's drier so usually more open and there is more skiable terrain (read: above treeline), I still carry them on multi-day trips but find that they are usually excess baggage.

The breaking trail thing is interesting: Ive tried both when breaking trail in deep snow and once in a while, like in deep unconsolidated powder, I find that beefy backcountry skis are actually easier. But YMMV of course.

 

[DougPaul]

I can't speak to your particular trip, but I'd only carry snowshoes if I was expecting to travel a route that involved terrain that is too difficult for me to ski or is unskiable for some reason.

Re breaking: I generally find breaking trail on skis to be easier unless the snow is so deep that I get tip dive.

Doug

 

[mirabela]

When you say "push through down to the Loj," do you mean from UW via Flowed Lands, Colden, and Avalanche Lake?

Or are you talking about Indian Pass? Or something else?

 

[David Metsky]

With modern skis you're more likely to break your leg before the ski. I'd bring a repair kit for the bindings, and if it was a particularly long multi-day trip I'd consider a spare binding. The only time I've ever carried snowshoes on a ski trip was with a large group and we carried one pair for the whole group on a 5 day trip.

 

[--M.]

Thank you all for your responses, most kind.

First, sorry, yes, we'll be skiing from Upper Works to Avalanche Lake and then down to Adirondack Loj. We'll spot a car there on Friday. It is my hope that one of the others will handle the drive back to Newcomb so we can go out first in Lake Placid. I personally expect to be pretty used up by the end of the day!

There are three of us; it'll probably work out to carry one set of shoes between us (as we will for a bivy/bag and other ten-essentials stuff); thanks, I appreciate that!

We've already done the ascending part of this trip previously, and it was done with the snowshoes remaining as ballast the whole time. I think for the descent, I'll either ski (probably with skins on -- I'm not that good) or shlep bare-boot, or use crampons.


Thanks again; hiking in legally-developing New Hampshire in the last few years has made me aware of the need to match both safety guidelines and cultural norms. I hope to NOT test the largesse of the people of New York.

Any comments from those who have done this route? It's quite common, I know. For gear, I'm eschewing skinny skis for edged skis with tele boots for the drop to the Adirondack Loj. It'll be heavier and slower on the rise, but perhaps more controlled on the down-slope.

 

[cushetunk]

In general, I wouldn't carry snowshoes if I was just planning to ski. I do carry some large hose clamps (or whatever they are called) that I can use to help fix a broken ski.

Snowshoes and other ballast items are not very helpful when attempting to ski or sidestep down anything.

 

[David Metsky]

For gear, I'm eschewing skinny skis for edged skis with tele boots for the drop to the Adirondack Loj. It'll be heavier and slower on the rise, but perhaps more controlled on the down-slope.

If you are climbing and expect to be making turns on the way down I find it's almost always a better choice to go for heavier gear. It may slow you down on the climb but the extra control on the descent makes for a safer and more enjoyable trip IMO.

 

[weatherman]

If you are climbing and expect to be making turns on the way down I find it's almost always a better choice to go for heavier gear. It may slow you down on the climb but the extra control on the descent makes for a safer and more enjoyable trip IMO.

YES. I've been pleasantly surprised with this. Skiing with a heavy pack (e.g. box of wine, bags of stew, etc) makes a more stable platform well worth the extra weight on the feet, even at altitude, and being somewhat top-heavy with skinny skis at the top of a steep hill is not a situation I enjoy. We define "type 1 fun" as fun you recognize when having it, and "type 2 fun" as fun you recognize when you're relaxing afterwards... faceplanting with an extra 30 lbs coming down on the back of my neck is, maybe, type 99 fun.

 

[--M.]

If you are climbing and expect to be making turns on the way down I find it's almost always a better choice to go for heavier gear. It may slow you down on the climb but the extra control on the descent makes for a safer and more enjoyable trip IMO.

Bingo.

Also, having skied with a heavy pack before (on the road to Camp Santanoni), I'll never do it again: when you fall, you get pile-driven into the ground, and yes, the fun factor hits the floor too.

Thanks again; now all I gotta do is make it to Newcomb tomorrow! I'll let you know how it went.

 

[--M.]

On Saturday, we skied this route, and no, we didn't need additional traction of any type.

http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthre...ss-to-Adirondack-Loj-on-Skis-February-15-2014

Thanks again for the comments, it was awesome!