Basic navigational skills badly missing

"Peewiglet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 16:17:15 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]>
wrote:

[...]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Navigational mistakes happen, even to people trained in navigation who
were paying attention to what they were doing. The only way to avoid
them entirely is to stay in the house.

Quoted message said:

I don't think it's clear from the article (as it currently appears)
that they lacked basic navigation skills. Skills quite a lot more
sophisticated than that are required in those sorts of conditions. I'm
basically saying that I don't think we have nearly enough info to
start labelling them.

Given that the Mountain Rescue are usually loath to criticise those they
rescue

That's not been my observation.

Certainly during my time as an MRT member in the 90's, criticism was very
much frowned upon. The feeling was that people could die if they didn't call
for maintain rescue in case they attracted criticism.

Quoted message said:

So a fool who knows where he *is* is twice as likely to call out a MRT
than a fool who doesn't?

Explain.

No, you'll possibly have lots of people thinking they'll be just fine as
long as they have a GPS with them as that way they can call up the MRT
on their pocket 'phone and get rescued at a given GR, as opposed to
thinking "it's a bit beyond me up there, I'd better stay down here".

Ask your local MRT is the portable telephone has or has not increased
the number of waste-of-time calls they receive. Extrapolate that level
of selfish foolishness to include universal GPS ownership.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

In article <[email hidden]>, Peewiglet
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I don't understand why some people are unwilling to admit the obvious
in relation to GPSs. In the situation the blokes were in, a working
GPS would have been a great help to the rescuers.

I agree with your point PW but the impression I got from some of the
previous posts was that some people were saying that others should carry
a GPS.

Here are my thoughts on that (not directed at you PW ;-)

I choose to carry a GPS much of the time (mostly for entertainment /
recording my trips rather than safety) but I think it wrong that people
dictate to others what equipment they should carry / wear / use.

Sometimes I do go out in the hills with lots of kit and at other times I
may take little more than I'm wearing. It is a choice I make and I don't
want any busybody interfering in that. We all have opinions as to what
clothing and equipment is or isn't appropriate for different activities
in different conditions and locations. Sometimes we can base our
opinions on experience and sometimes we will extrapolate beyond our
experience.

Ask a group of fell runners what equipment is essential to carry on the
hill, then ask the same of a group of experienced hill walkers and then
ask the same of people wandering the streets of Ambleside on a sunny
afternoon with lots of expensive gear. There will be lots of different
answers but none of them will necessarily be right. The wise will
probably say the answer depends upon the conditions / location /
activity and experience of the user.

As others have pointed out knowledge / experience is far more important
than kit. In many circumstances a positive attitude is even more
important than knowledge.

Should we therefore have a right to roam testing / licensing scheme to
ensure that people have the requisite level of attitude, knowledge and
experience prior to being allowed off the road?

Not only do I think that such a scheme would be wrong but I also think
it would be totally impractical and un-enforceable. Many a time when I
have been heading up onto the moors nobody has been in the area to see
me let alone verify my credentials!

--

Dominic Sexton

Peter Clinch said:

Quoted message said:

So a fool who knows where he *is* is twice as likely to call out a MRT
than a fool who doesn't?

Explain.

No, you'll possibly have lots of people thinking they'll be just fine as
long as they have a GPS with them as that way they can call up the MRT
on their pocket 'phone and get rescued at a given GR, as opposed to
thinking "it's a bit beyond me up there, I'd better stay down here".

So by that logic if you also banned maps and compasses even more people
would think "it's a bit beyond me up there, I'd better stay down here"
and there would be even less callouts. Same if you banned waterproofs.
Same if you banned footwear.

Interesting view.

Daytona said:

That they had to call MRT and MRT opted to extract them and commented

[BBC web site:]

Quoted message said:

| "Inspector Graham Gibb, of Braemar Mountain Rescue Team, who
|co-ordinated the search, said the men were lucky to be alive.

[...]

Quoted message said:

| If we had failed to find them. I don't think they could have survived
| another night under the conditions that were forecast."

Indicates to me that they were not properly equipped for the
conditions and their level of experience. I assume the MRTs operation
means that they could not have sat it out.

Does that mean that if someone requires help from an MRT, then it
follows from that fact alone that they must lack experience, equipment,
or both?
--
Rudi Winter, Aberystwyth, Wales

Quoted message said:

So by that logic if you also banned maps and compasses even more people
would think "it's a bit beyond me up there, I'd better stay down here"
and there would be even less callouts. Same if you banned waterproofs.
Same if you banned footwear.

GPS units are not banned. Nor am I trying to discourage their use. So
it isn't "the same logic" at all.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:48:02 -0000, "Bob Watkinson"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

[...]

Quoted message said:

Certainly during my time as an MRT member in the 90's, criticism was very
much frowned upon. The feeling was that people could die if they didn't call
for maintain rescue in case they attracted criticism.

Fairly regularly, though, the press seems to publish criticisms from
MR members of people they've rescued. I'm sure that's only a small
number of the rescues that have taken place, but I've certainly
developed the impression that if I were unfortunate enough to have to
be rescued then I'd need to be able to explain myself very clearly in
order to avoid either explicit or implicit criticism.

The approach you've described seems sensible to me, and at the end of
the day no-one compels people to join MR teams. I'm sure that most
people doing it get a lot of satisfaction out of it, as well as all
the social stuff that goes with it.

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \

Peter Clinch said:

Quoted message said:

So by that logic if you also banned maps and compasses even more people
would think "it's a bit beyond me up there, I'd better stay down here"
and there would be even less callouts. Same if you banned waterproofs.
Same if you banned footwear.

GPS units are not banned. Nor am I trying to discourage their use. So
it isn't "the same logic" at all.

Sorry. I thought you *were* trying to discourage use of GPS on the
basis that you felt it would double MRT callouts. My mistake.

On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 23:04:31 +0000, Bootlaces <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I was thinking that they chose to take a mobile phone and chose to not
take a GPS...

I do the same, on the basis that I own one but not the other ;-)

--
Oppose ID cards and the database state - sign the pledge at
http://www.pledgebank.com/refuse

Quoted message said:

Sorry. I thought you *were* trying to discourage use of GPS on the
basis that you felt it would double MRT callouts. My mistake.

Only in the hands of clueless numpties (as with mobile 'phones).

I am trying to discourage the state of mind where people acquire a GPS
unit /purely/ because it is regarded as a "must-have" safety item,
because such items IME tend to engender an opinion of "I'll be all right
with one of these!". Google "Risk homeostais" and "risk compensation"
for more on where I'm coming from.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Dominic Sexton said:

Quoted message said:

I don't understand why some people are unwilling to admit the obvious
in relation to GPSs. In the situation the blokes were in, a working
GPS would have been a great help to the rescuers.

I agree with your point PW but the impression I got from some of the
previous posts was that some people were saying that others should carry
a GPS.

Ah, well: maybe someone did: I didn't notice.

Having said that, and since you've raised the point, I do consider it
pretty daft to go out without one, and if I was a member of an MRT
that had to spend ages searching in dangerous conditions for someone
who could have been located easily if they'd had the means of passing
on a GR I'd be pretty annoyed.

Istm that if we expect the volunteers to turn out and help us in times
of crisis then the least we can do is take cheap and simple
precautions to keep the risk to them as low as possible. Having said
that, a GPS wouldn't normally help the MRT - it just so happens that
it would have done on the occasion that we're discussing, though.

Quoted message said:

Here are my thoughts on that (not directed at you PW ;-)

I choose to carry a GPS much of the time (mostly for entertainment /
recording my trips rather than safety) but I think it wrong that people
dictate to others what equipment they should carry / wear / use.

Of course it's wrong to attempt to dictate, but I think it's fairly
natural that people will make observations, in the context of this
being a walking NG dedicated to discussing this sort of stuff 🙂

Quoted message said:

Sometimes I do go out in the hills with lots of kit and at other times I
may take little more than I'm wearing. It is a choice I make and I don't
want any busybody interfering in that. We all have opinions as to what
clothing and equipment is or isn't appropriate for different activities
in different conditions and locations. Sometimes we can base our
opinions on experience and sometimes we will extrapolate beyond our
experience.

Ask a group of fell runners what equipment is essential to carry on the
hill, then ask the same of a group of experienced hill walkers and then
ask the same of people wandering the streets of Ambleside on a sunny
afternoon with lots of expensive gear. There will be lots of different
answers but none of them will necessarily be right. The wise will
probably say the answer depends upon the conditions / location /
activity and experience of the user.

As others have pointed out knowledge / experience is far more important
than kit. In many circumstances a positive attitude is even more
important than knowledge.

Of course it is, but even the most experienced person can trip and
break a leg (etc), and if he/she is alone and immobile then it seems
very obvious to me that a phone and a GPS may turn out to be more
helpful both to the walker and the MRT than 30 years' experience in
the hills. If there's no reception then the phone won't help and so
nor will the GPS, but the walker's then no worse off than he/she would
have been without it. If there is reception, though, the phone & GPS
have the potential to save lives.

I entirely agree with you that it's up to the individual to decide
what to take, but I also feel it's a pointless waste of time to try to
deny that certain readily available and inexpensive modern gizmos
(phone, GPS) can be enormously helpful. If people choose not to take
them then so be it, but that doesn't make the gadgets less useful.

I wonder if this sort of debate went on when maps and compasses were
first introduced? Devil's spawn, etc.... 🙂

Quoted message said:

Should we therefore have a right to roam testing / licensing scheme to
ensure that people have the requisite level of attitude, knowledge and
experience prior to being allowed off the road?

Um... I know you're thinking aloud, but I really don't see how you get
there from the simple observation that the availability of a grid
reference would have been of assistance to the MR team last week!

No, I'd not be in favour of a licensing scheme. I'm not in favour of
identity cards, or random imprisonment either. Or cold baked beans or
sweetcorn.

Quoted message said:

Not only do I think that such a scheme would be wrong but I also think
it would be totally impractical and un-enforceable. Many a time when I
have been heading up onto the moors nobody has been in the area to see
me let alone verify my credentials!

It's interesting - maybe worth starting a thread to see what people
think about it?

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \

Peter Clinch said:

Not nearly as much time and effort compared to if they'd read the
weather forecast though. If you shouldn't really be there then you
shouldn't really be there.

So was the forecast being issued in Scotland for Wednesday different
from that which was available down here? The one I heard didn't
mention anything particularly unpleasant until the day after these 4
went out. I don't know what MWIS was predicting, since I couldn't
make it up to Scotland last weekend so wasn't checking the detail.

S.

--
Oppose ID cards and the database state - sign the pledge at
http://www.pledgebank.com/refuse

On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 20:24:18 +0000, Peewiglet <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Yes, I realise that. I was pointing out that my experience has been
different i.e. I've not observed the MR to be loath to criticise those
they rescue.

They used to be. But these days it seems to happen a lot more often.
Which may of course just mean that there are a lot more numpties
venturing into the hills than there used to be, but my impression is
that some MRTs are a lot more willing to criticise publicly than they
once were.

S.

--
Oppose ID cards and the database state - sign the pledge at
http://www.pledgebank.com/refuse

[email hidden] said...

Quoted message said:

Chris Gilbert said:

214Fells said:

The main point being that "some" walkers appear to see a GPS just as
new-fangled technology NOT as a safety aid. That appears illogical and
leads down a very, very *rocky* road???

A fool with a tool is still a fool.

Yes, but with GPS he's a fool who knows where he is.

And of course with a GPS you can follow a track down to safety without
needing to look at where you're going or at a map. Until the 'track'
disappears over a cliff because the GPS will give you the most direct
route, not necessarily the safest...
--
To reply see 'from' in headers; lose the domain, and insert dots and @
where common sense dictates.

Simon Caldwell said:

On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 20:24:18 +0000, Peewiglet <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Yes, I realise that. I was pointing out that my experience has been
different i.e. I've not observed the MR to be loath to criticise those
they rescue.

They used to be. But these days it seems to happen a lot more often.

Yes, that's what I've noticed.

Quoted message said:

Which may of course just mean that there are a lot more numpties
venturing into the hills than there used to be, but my impression is
that some MRTs are a lot more willing to criticise publicly than they
once were.

Same here.

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \

Fran said:

And of course with a GPS you can follow a track down to safety without
needing to look at where you're going or at a map. Until the 'track'
disappears over a cliff because the GPS will give you the most direct
route, not necessarily the safest...

Well the 1 in 10,000,000 person stupid enough to do that is unlikely
to have survived long enough to get out of the house, let alone
anywhere near the hills.

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \

Peewiglet said:

Having said that, and since you've raised the point, I do consider it
pretty daft to go out without one

So do you really think that the majority of the nation's walkers are
"pretty daft"? Strikes me as rather strong!

Quoted message said:

and if I was a member of an MRT
that had to spend ages searching in dangerous conditions for someone
who could have been located easily if they'd had the means of passing
on a GR I'd be pretty annoyed.

Though among the members of MRTs I know personally there doesn't seem to
be any such sentiment, at least that they're readily admitting to..

Quoted message said:

Istm that if we expect the volunteers to turn out and help us in times
of crisis then the least we can do is take cheap and simple
precautions to keep the risk to them as low as possible.

Yet it is still the case that I have /never/ heard an MRT member (and I
know a few) state anything along the lines of thinking it "daft" not to
take a GPS with you every time. ISTM that you're making rather big
assumptions about the opinions of a lot of volunteers, who only need to
change their mind to stop being volunteers, after all.

Quoted message said:

I entirely agree with you that it's up to the individual to decide
what to take, but I also feel it's a pointless waste of time to try to
deny that certain readily available and inexpensive modern gizmos
(phone, GPS) can be enormously helpful.

Who is trying to deny any such thing though?

The crucial difference is between thinking something may be helpful and
thinking one is morally obliged to carry it. The MRTs don't, AFAICT,
feel it is a case of the latter.

Quoted message said:

I wonder if this sort of debate went on when maps and compasses were
first introduced? Devil's spawn, etc.... 🙂

At a talk from my neighbour and MRT leader Alfie Ingram I was at about
MRT work, he started with a couple of slides. One was of someone in All
The Right Gear with map and compass and another was a shepherd in tweeds
and wellies with anything he'd need in his pockets. No map, no compass,
no waterproofs, both headed out into similar terrain. Next point was it
was almost always the first sort who needed the services of the MRT.
Maps and compasses are certainly not Must Haves if you know the area
you're in. Typically they are regarded as Must Haves because
recreational walkers are often not intimately acquainted with the area
they are in, but again we must avoid generalising a typical case to all
cases.

Quoted message said:

Um... I know you're thinking aloud, but I really don't see how you get
there from the simple observation that the availability of a grid
reference would have been of assistance to the MR team last week!

It's the very thin end of a thick wedge. Higher up you've been saying
it's (IYHO) daft not to take a GPS, next step on from that is it becomes
a widespread feeling amongst Joe Public, then it becomes a contributory
negligence claim by an insurance company, etc. etc.

We've had in the last few years the spectres of compulsory insurance and
suspension of access rights at night or in bad weather, so it's wrong to
think this sort of idea can't get thrown about in some very high places.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Fran said:

[email hidden] said...

Quoted message said:

Chris Gilbert said:

214Fells wrote:

> The main point being that "some" walkers appear to see a GPS just as
> new-fangled technology NOT as a safety aid. That appears illogical and
> leads down a very, very *rocky* road???

A fool with a tool is still a fool.

Yes, but with GPS he's a fool who knows where he is.

And of course with a GPS you can follow a track down to safety without
needing to look at where you're going or at a map. Until the 'track'
disappears over a cliff because the GPS will give you the most direct
route, not necessarily the safest...

Fran, you have a fundamental lack of understanding of what GPS does for
you.

GPS gives you your position. Nothing else. It does the position - you
have to choose the route. If you choose to do that with a poorly chosen
waypoint that is your mistake and nothing to do with GPS.

As a sailor I struggle to see why you need GPS on featured land at all.
Might be handy in a desert...

"Dominic Sexton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Daytona
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

If they suspected that they didn't have the experience to walk out
from a hostile environment then it's common sense

It is common sense not to go there in the first place if that is the case.

How do we know they suspected this? Prior to the experience they may have
had no idea what they were up against.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to me that they
should have equipped themselves to be able sit it out ie food,
shelter, warmth.

Yes but not a tent. Even relatively light backpacking tents (which would
probably not survive bad conditions in the Cairngorms) are nearly 2kg for
two people. A decent mountain tent suited to high winds is more like 3+ kg
for two.

On the other hand a group shelter / bothy bag weighs far less. My 2 person
one is 425g and my 6-8 person one is 640g. They are well worth the weight
if out in a group with the chance of poor weather.

Agreed. I don't know if this group had any sort of nominated leader but if
they did have a trained leader (suspect not) then for that leader not to
have a group shelter for the Cairngorms in Winter is gross negligence.

Quoted message said:

Carrying extra weight and bulk like that on a day trip makes it more
likely to be needed for that unplanned overnight stay!

--

Dominic Sexton

Fran said:

And of course with a GPS you can follow a track down to safety without
needing to look at where you're going or at a map

Or simply retrace your steps.
--

Paul Rooney