In reply to Rich W Parker:
I find this subject fascinating, and we only develop our own understanding and approach by discussing openly with others, so I too welcome such a discussion.
I get all of your points, and completely agree with the majority. I didn't want to write a long post, although it would have been very similar to yours, rather I just wanted to show the far extreme (i.e. burial) that can happen in Scotland. I was fairly certain you would be aware of those incidents too, being in the MR community, but not all reading this thread may be.
All of this comes down to, as I said above and as you allude to, a complete suite of skills. Some of them can be used independently as a baseline (snowpack and terrain understanding), heuristics etc, and some are in addition to that (transceiver search techniques).
Picking up on a couple of your points to add my spin to them:
> Having TPS can lead to a sense of invulnerablity. Now, this sounds a bit far fetched, but there are volumes of evidence to suggest this, it is a powerful heuristic and should not be underestimated.
I count knowledge of heuristics and biases in the decision-making process as one of the suite of tools I talk about above. It's all in the mix. I have overheard people stating they would take greater risks on Cat 4 days as they 'had the kit', confusing risk management with consequence management, so I too have seen this first-hand.
> My great concern is that people with some knowledge, but not a lot, use a gadget at the expensive of other things that are actually much more likley to keep them safe i.e. avoidance. I take people climbing and mountaineering in the winter for a living and do not use TPS, for one I don't need to in order to keep my clients safe, and secondly find that it creates a confusing message.
I wonder if this is a differential between not wishing to teach clients who may not have a great base of knowledge a potentially confusing message, and those of us who are fortunate to have experience under our belt putting together all the bits of the toolkit? A full mountain education (which, of course, never ends) includes all manner of things one can't hope to pick up with some tuition alone, primarily, I would argue, how all the areas interact on a given day, in given conditions, on a given route, with a given group, etc...
I would pick up on AIH's comment below too:
> If I was a back country skier I'd take all 3 out constantly as I'd be looking for snowfields and passing through the environment at a much greater speed. As a mountaineer I put a great deal more emphasis on the Be Avalanche Aware Process and avoidance.
I count myself as both - these days I find myself primarily climbing couloirs in order to ski them. I'd rather not drop in to something blind and not know the conditions. This means I am subjecting myself (and the snowpack) to both styles of movement. I'm probably more likely to wade up something to ski it in nice condition than to wait for it to be bullet-hard neve which is easier to climb, but a lot more committing to ski.
As a result of this particular risk combination, coupled with my views gained from experience, I think it sensible to wear the kit.
I am not a professional but having had climbing parents, have been in the hills for essentially my entire life, and for the past 15 have multiple alpine and winter seasons, and have climbed in the greater ranges. Only moderate stuff in the grand scheme of things, but it's all mountain time. This coupled with continually seeking to educate myself has led me to my decision point and my views on the matter. I do not say this as a 'hey look at me and how cool I am' thing, but to hopefully show I am not coming at this from an unconsidered stance, or the stance you point out of a bit of knowledge giving a false sense of security.
Fascinating subject - I can discuss this all night, although ideally with a pint in front of a nice fire!