Incident at Great Falls
Paul Schelp
rapid known as Subway while attempting a run down the Center
Line of Great Falls. The level was reported by USGS as 3.28
feet that morning (about 4,000 cfs total flow). This is on
the low end of the normal range for running the Center Line.
All three are ok. The first boater made it through fine, but
the next two got banged up and swam. One swimmer's Backlund
paddle was broken in half, and the other swimmer's paddle
was damaged. One of the paddlers was checked out at the
hospital for a possible head injury, but is fine.
This was the first time Subway has ever been run. Subway is
the chute just a few feet to the left of the normal line
through the Streamers, which is the last of three major
drops in the Center Line. Subway is a steep double drop,
totalling maybe 18 feet, with much of the flow going under a
table rock at the bottom. At levels below 3 feet, it is a
violent and nasty-looking affair, with all of the water
(maybe 200 cfs) going under the table rock.
All three of the boaters had run Great Falls before, and two
of them had run the Center Line before, but at a 50% higher
flow (about 6500 cfs).
The group shore scouted the run from the flake, but
miscalculated their position once they reached the eddy
above the last drop. The lead boater, who had run the Center
Line before, peeled out and ran Subway. The other two
followed after giving several seconds between each run. An
attempt by the first boater to wave off the next two was not
visible to the boaters in the top eddy waiting to make their
runs.
It is possible that the lower water level yesterday might
have played a role in the lead boater's decision to run the
wrong line. When sitting in that last eddy, the various
chutes over the Streamers look dramatically different at 3.2
feet than they do at 3.6 feet, the level he had run it
before. These differences may not have been evident during
the shore scout.
At 3.2 feet, what is actually the correct line has a very
meager flow compared to the substantial flow heading into
Subway. Also, the very lip of the drop on the proper line
tends to notch out at low levels, something that would have
looked unfamiliar to some one who had run it at higher
flows, when it is a broader chute with healthy flow.
RivierRatt
>On Sunday morning, three kayakers unintentionally ran the
>rapid known as Subway while attempting a run down the Center
>Line of Great Falls. The level was reported by USGS as 3.28
>feet that morning (about 4,000 cfs total flow). This is on
>the low end of the normal range for running the Center Line.
>
>All three are ok. The first boater made it through fine, but
>the next two got banged up and swam. One swimmer's Backlund
>paddle was broken in half, and the other swimmer's paddle
>was damaged. One of the paddlers was checked out at the
>hospital for a possible head injury, but is fine.
Whoa. Glad they're okay.
If you look at the description of the Upper Yough in the books, *Appalachian
Whitewater*, it says, "run it only with someone who knows it intiMattly, with
experience at *all* water levels." There's plenty of evidence that many UY
newbies are ignoring this advice; with advanced boats and technique yadayada,
it's probably not necessary the way it was back in 198x, when the book was
writ. (Ain't no locals shooting at yer shuttle ve-hicle, neither.)
That advice would seem to be essential, though, for people running river
sections that would be classified as "hair." It seems the Great Falls, despite
a plethora of able and experienced Falls runners, still qualifies.
I'm so glad they're okay. Let's be careful out there, folks.
Riviera Ratt # 77, Charter Member of PFA, 4/14/99
Still Rattless in '99!!!
Ratt Boy’s Click of The Week updated 5/15/99
For a good time, call http://members.aol.com/RivierRatt/ratthole.html
slim jim
Paul Schelp <sch...@erols.com> wrote in article
<37403e3f...@news.erols.com>...
> This was the first time Subway has ever been run.
On May 14th Paul Shelp wrote:
> On the other hand, some of the rapids, like Charlie's Hole,
> are among the most challenging rapids in the world, and
> others, like Subway, have never been run.
So Paul,
Coincidence, cover story, or Murphys' Law?
> An attempt by the first boater to wave off the next two was not
> visible to the boaters in the top eddy waiting to make their
> runs.
So beginners and wannabes take note. Once you're a grownup,
self-sufficient, expert
Class V, VI paddler, if your friend jumps off a cliff, and you can't see if
they survived,
it's OK for you to jump in after them!
Like the old GF Park maintenance man told me: "It's a lot of trouble, but
they
only do it once!"
Jim Stuart
Mickie
> > An attempt by the first boater to wave off the next two was not
> > visible to the boaters in the top eddy waiting to make their
> > runs.
>
> So beginners and wannabes take note. Once you're a grownup,
> self-sufficient, expert
> Class V, VI paddler, if your friend jumps off a cliff, and you can't see if
> they survived,
> it's OK for you to jump in after them!
Jim,
Poor correlation: if you jump off a cliff you *know* you'll be seriously
injured or worse; it's suicidal I'd say. Conversely in river running if
you *know* you'll be seriously injured or worse you stay clear, you
don't "jump" into it. I don't believe these paddlers felt they were
"jumping off cliffs."
What *should* they had done Jim (or anyone)? You can't see if your bud
and "leader" made it down. If there was an easy way off the river to
determine from shore or a rock if their bud was OK, should one or both
of them had done that? Obviously this would take time - do they really
have that luxury, i.e., the time to confirm the lead boater is OK? What
if the leader were injured or in trouble..in that situation you would
want to get there as quickly as possible but without risking injury to
yourself. So what do you do? Confirm everything is OK before
proceeding (even if that will mean if things aren't OK, it is unlikely
you'll be able to do much once you've realized that) or proceed
downriver, to be there in the event something is wrong.
And remember they really didn't have all that much time to ponder and
decide while on the river as we do now.
Of course maybe none of that is going on in their minds. Maybe all
they're thinking is: they've run this before (and they believe they're
on line). Therefore, they don't *think* there's really any danger.
That's the green light for action - I've done it before; the person
ahead of me has done it before. I can go (after giving the lead boater
enough time to get down). In any event, there did not appear to be any
indicators that would lead them to believe they would be in danger by
taking the route the leader took.
I probably would had done the same...
But, for opinions here, what should those 2 boaters had done under the
circumstances after the lead boater ran and they couldn't see him? I'm
not asking if they *belonged* on the river...
Paul - thanks for posting! *And* very happy all 3 paddlers lived.
Hopefully we can all learn something from this!
Mickie
"We do not see things as they are; we see them as we are"
Author unknown
Joel D. Meadows
> and "leader" made it down. If there was an easy way off the river to
> determine from shore or a rock if their bud was OK, should one or both
> of them had done that? Obviously this would take time - do they really
> have that luxury, i.e., the time to confirm the lead boater is OK? What
> if the leader were injured or in trouble..in that situation you would
> want to get there as quickly as possible but without risking injury to
> yourself. So what do you do? Confirm everything is OK before
> proceeding (even if that will mean if things aren't OK, it is unlikely
> you'll be able to do much once you've realized that) or proceed
> downriver, to be there in the event something is wrong.
>
> they're thinking is: they've run this before (and they believe they're
> on line). Therefore, they don't *think* there's really any danger.
> That's the green light for action - I've done it before; the person
> ahead of me has done it before. I can go (after giving the lead boater
> enough time to get down). In any event, there did not appear to be any
> indicators that would lead them to believe they would be in danger by
> taking the route the leader took.
>
> I probably would had done the same...
>
> But, for opinions here, what should those 2 boaters had done under the
> circumstances after the lead boater ran and they couldn't see him? I'm
> not asking if they *belonged* on the river...
First off, they should have gone with a more experienced Falls runner. I just
don't see how anyone who has done the center line before can mistake that slot,
even at low water. In my opinion, it is very obvious that the Subway route is
ugly at any level. Secondly, at least one of them should have been out of their
boat on the rocks for visual confirmation of a successful run (and with a rope).
These simple things alone would have done quite a bit to change this situation.
Even if no one was out on the rocks already, they could have, if necessary,
ferried back over to river right side of the big island to hop out and take a
look. It amazes me how many boaters will blindly follow their "leader", even
right above huge sketchy waterfalls. Sometimes it is better to trust your gut
and get out to check things out for yourself if you are unclear about what is
going on.
In any case, these three are very lucky.....it could have been another awful week
for the boating community. Be careful out there.....
Until later,
Joel D.
Mrmodes
boaters could've agreed on waiting for an "exuberant hoop signal" (like
WAHOOO!).instead of "NO NO nO ARRGHH!"
Mis-reading the approach from shore was the near fatal mistake here.
Mack-guyver
and to Paul about the probable river level before he wrote his report (the
gages are not working properly). I was not on the river on Sunday, but the
following day (yesterday), when the USGS gage was reading 3.06', a friend
and I went to run the Falls and found the level to be at least 3.35' (still
good for the the Center Lines). So, on Sunday, I suspect the level was at
least 3.40', a level that has significant flow through the correct line at
the Fingers, and probably about the best level for running that complete
route through Great Falls (the drops get crunchier much below that level).
Subway looked ugly, but not necessarily a death trap at that level. It
looks much worse at lower levels, as Paul describes.
I have a pretty good shot of Martin Radigan running the Fingers on my web
page at:
http://potomac.pair.com/gfpics/MFINGER.JPG
The shot was probably taken at about the same level, and Subway would be off
the right-hand edge of the shot, right on the other side of the large rock.
In this shot: http://potomac.pair.com/PODECK3.jpg taken at a higher level,
the correct line at the Fingers is just to the right (river left side) of
young Paul Schelp's stern, and Subway is the double-drop show fully in the
right-hand corner of the frame. Paul is a hundred yards or so downstream of
the Falls, Pirouetting off of O-Deck 1.
The lead boater, and at least one of the other two, had run the Fingers once
or twice before, but not this year. When scouting from the Flake, as they
had done while carrying up, it is pretty easy to spot the correct line and
pick a landmark. After running the first two drops, though, it is not
really possible to get out again or scout above the Fingers. It's a short,
wide eddy with several blind drops in a row. The horizon line keeps you
from seeing anything for quite a ways downstream, and the waterfalls are too
loud for voice communication.
I had talked to one of the boaters on Friday, two days before the run, and
suggested that I might meet them if they called me. When I heard a
third-hand report (e-mail from Paul) on Monday morning that someone had gone
to the hospital, I freaked out. Fortunately, I was able to get one of them
on the phone within about 10 minutes and found out they were all fine, thank
goodness.
David Mackintosh
fallZ...@hotmail.com
http://potomac.pair.com
Paul Schelp wrote in message <37403e3f...@news.erols.com>...
>On Sunday morning, three kayakers unintentionally ran the
>rapid known as Subway while attempting a run down the Center
>Line of Great Falls. The level was reported by USGS as 3.28
>feet that morning (about 4,000 cfs total flow). This is on
>the low end of the normal range for running the Center Line.
>
>All three are ok. The first boater made it through fine, but
>the next two got banged up and swam. One swimmer's Backlund
>paddle was broken in half, and the other swimmer's paddle
>was damaged. One of the paddlers was checked out at the
>hospital for a possible head injury, but is fine.
>
>This was the first time Subway has ever been run. Subway is
>the chute just a few feet to the left of the normal line
>through the Streamers, which is the last of three major
>drops in the Center Line. Subway is a steep double drop,
>totalling maybe 18 feet, with much of the flow going under a
>table rock at the bottom. At levels below 3 feet, it is a
>violent and nasty-looking affair, with all of the water
>(maybe 200 cfs) going under the table rock.
>
>All three of the boaters had run Great Falls before, and two
>of them had run the Center Line before, but at a 50% higher
>flow (about 6500 cfs).
>
>The group shore scouted the run from the flake, but
>miscalculated their position once they reached the eddy
>above the last drop. The lead boater, who had run the Center
>Line before, peeled out and ran Subway. The other two
>followed after giving several seconds between each run. An
>attempt by the first boater to wave off the next two was not
>visible to the boaters in the top eddy waiting to make their
>runs.
>
Mack-guyver
Agreed, although I'm a proponent of "WOO-HOO!" rather than "WAHOOO!",
myself.
Jeepyak
>Paul - thanks for posting! *And* very happy all 3 paddlers lived.
>Hopefully we can all learn something from this!
I too am glad that the paddlers were OK, but I thought they weren't supposed to
paddle Great Falls on the weekends. If anyone knows these paddlers, would you
please tell them to follow the rules before they decide to make falls running
illegal.
Dougie, Live long and
paddle.
Cubicdog
Mickie <mic...@ct1.nai.net> wrote:
> I don't believe these paddlers felt they were
> "jumping off cliffs."
They never do.
:wq
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
Big Mack
jee...@aol.com (Jeepyak) wrote:
> I too am glad that the paddlers were OK, but I thought they weren't
supposed to
> paddle Great Falls on the weekends. If anyone knows these paddlers,
would you
> please tell them to follow the rules before they decide to make falls
running
> illegal.
No, there aren't any specific days of the week or times that are "off-
limits" according to the new Boater Etiquette guidlines that have been
endorsed by the park service and MD DNR. What we do want to do is
avoid times of high visitation, and keep a low profile. Read the
complete text at:
http://potomac.pair.com/GFtimes.txt
I don't know what time of day the incident occurred (mid-morning?) and
how many visitors were present at the overlooks. If the weather was
not particularly nice, there may have been few observers. I do most of
my Falls runs during the week, but I'm just fortunate that my schedule
allows this. For runs involving scouting, portaging, or setting
safety, I would encourage boaters to come on a weekday, early morning
on a weekend, or in cold or wet weather.
David Mackintosh
fallZ...@hotmail.com
http://potomac.pair.com
Big Mack
"Joel D. Meadows" <mea...@tetratech-ffx.com> wrote:
> First off, they should have gone with a more experienced Falls
runner. I just
> don't see how anyone who has done the center line before can mistake
that slot,
> even at low water. In my opinion, it is very obvious that the Subway
route is
> ugly at any level.
Agreed.
> Secondly, at least one of them should have been out of their
> boat on the rocks for visual confirmation of a successful run (and
with a rope).
> These simple things alone would have done quite a bit to change this
situation.
> Even if no one was out on the rocks already, they could have, if
necessary,
> ferried back over to river right side of the big island to hop out
and take a
> look. It amazes me how many boaters will blindly follow
their "leader", even
> right above huge sketchy waterfalls. Sometimes it is better to
trust your gut
> and get out to check things out for yourself if you are unclear about
what is
> going on.
At that level (I went the following day), you can't really get back out
once you've run the double drop above the Fingers. At lower levels (it
was around 3.4' in my estimation), when there isn't as much water
coming through Angel Slot and down the far river-right Finger, you can
get out on the Flake there, but I've never done it. Each of the
boaters needs to know 100% which slot to take before running Grace,
IMO. The boaters did scout the whole run before beginning, but somehow
the lead boater got confused in the eddy above the last drop.
We have set safety below Grace on occasion, but I've never seen it done
for the lower drops.
> In any case, these three are very lucky.....it could have been
another awful week
> for the boating community. Be careful out there.....
They were also good boaters, but made a mental error. There are a
number of boaters who have carried up to just run the Fingers (it's by
far the easiest drop here) who would have been much less likely to have
gotten through Subway alive. The fact that one of them made it through
OK, and two "just" broke their paddles and took face hits is a result
of skill and luck.
news.innova.net
..... " YEEEEEEHAW "
Not only will yer buds know you OK but ya never know what may come strolling
out of the woods in response.
On second thought a Homeresque "WOO-HOO" is good too.
Mack-guyver wrote in message <7hrkun$svb$1...@news1.Radix.Net>...
Paul Schelp
>...The fact that one of them made it through OK, and two "just" broke
One of the two boaters who swam flipped half-way through Subway, and
dropped into the sieve area at the foot of Subway upside down.
Oci-One Kanubi
own a Backlund paddle? Here's the inside scoop, filtered through my
Altzheimer's:
My finny pals have run the VA and MD lines, and p'raps others, 25 or 30
times each. Neither is a braggart, scalp-taker, or gunstock-notcher (in
fact all three of these adventurers are pretty modest and unassuming),
both are known to carry around rapids that over-gnarl them, and both
like steep-creekin' and big-droppin'.
Unfortunately, their buddy (with much more Great Falls experience, and a
longer history of succesful true-Class-V running), who was lucky or
skillful enough to get down this drop intact, is evidently deficient in
his knowlege of river signals. It was probably he who reported that "he
tried to wave them off". My friend, though he paddles a little too
close to the edge for my taste, is also an ACA-certified safety
instructor who dedicates five or six weekends per year to teaching the
standard ACA safety syllabus. From where my buddy sat in the staging
eddy, he could see *all* of the guy down below, who was holding his
paddle vertically (and claims he was waving it back and forth) to "wave
them off."
Silly friend of mine; he thought the vertical paddle meant "come ahead,"
and since (a) the probe was sitting safely in the eddy below the drop,
and (b) the line they had scouted, with a marker rock that looked 'way
too much like the wrong rock they actually lined up on, was for these
accomplished waterfall-runners (Smokey Mtns to the Adirondacks -- I've
run several of these waterfalls with 'em both) an easy, one-step, 50-cfs
drop into a calm pool, he, well, went ahead. As did #3. Ouch. Ouch.
People are also whining about how this trio should have been guided by
an experienced Great Falls boater. Er, ahhhh... how do these folks
imagine the experienced GF boaters *got* that experience? There is a
great satisfaction -- perhaps, for many people a large part of the
allure of the sport -- in scouting unfamiliar rapids and working out yer
own mode of approach. And when you boat this way, sometimes you skroo
up. I've certainly done so on rapids of lesser difficulty, but where I
was boating near the limit of my skill at the time, and revelling in the
aesthetic pleassure of choosing and running an elegant line through an
unfamiliar rapid. I've also revelled in my survival when I did skroo
up. Get a guide? Go to Disneyland! Push yer personnal limits and you
will make mistakes. Fortunately, the river is much more benign than we
think, so we survive many of these potentially fatal mistakes, as long
as we are judicious, push our limits just a wee bit further each time,
and don't do so every durned weekend.
Since he had scouted from the Flake, and since he followed the probe
insufficiently-critically, my bud blames himself, despite the bizarre
"wave off" signal; he says he should have assured himself that, indeed
he was using the right marker rock. BUT, he hasn't got a lot of
patience for everyone who is running around clucking over this
incident. He knows he had at least as much chance of dying in the
Subway as I had several weeks earlier when I jammed my paddle under a
rock near the top of Little Niagara (I *don't* have a hands-roll, thank
you, and I was
upside-down moving my stick to my setup-side when said paddle-jamming
occured, nearly yerking my shoulder out in the process) and had to swim
my boat into an eddy 150 yards downstream. No-one would have called me
foolish for being on the Upper Yough at ~2.3' in an open canoe, but I
could have died. Excretion occurs, folks. Deal with it.
I hope my friends don't get themselves killed on some river, but they
are paddling merely at the limit of their skills (and most weekends they
do "easy" stuff like the Upper Yough and Lower Big Sandy) and never, so
far in my observation, beyond their skills. They've both gotten bruised
from time to time, although neither has had as many stitches from
river-rocks as I have (and *lots* of folks like to boat with *me*
because they know they are safer with me than with most people.) Ditto,
me with this trio, because on any river within my skill range, these
folks make
*great* safety-boaters for me! I don't condemn them; I'm just sorry my
bud lost his paddle.
-Richard
PS, my buddy stuck the half of his paddle which he was able to recover
into a crevice, so he could retrieve it later for Keith's
ministrations. It has been reported to him that a rescue-squad zodiac
was seen making the O-Deck attainment, motoring *directly* to where the
paddle-half was stashed, and stealing it. Yer tax-dollars at work. -R
========================================================================
Richard Hopley, #39, OC-1; concise and to the point, as usual.
Rockville, Maryland, USA, BBM; (301) 330-8265
Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll.
Jeepyak
writes:
>No, there aren't any specific days of the week or times that are "off-
>limits" according to the new Boater Etiquette guidlines that have been
>endorsed by the park service and MD DNR. What we do want to do is
>avoid times of high visitation, and keep a low profile. Read the
>complete text at:
>http://potomac.pair.com/GFtimes.txt
I apologize David, I misinturpreted the guidelines, I am glad to see that the
boaters were going by the new boater etiquette guidelines, and I hope the two
that were injured are doing better.
Paul Schelp
>There is a great satisfaction -- perhaps, for many people a large part of the
>allure of the sport -- in scouting unfamiliar rapids and working out yer
>own mode of approach. And when you boat this way, sometimes you skroo
>up. I've certainly done so on rapids of lesser difficulty, but where I
>was boating near the limit of my skill at the time, and revelling in the
>aesthetic pleassure of choosing and running an elegant line through an
>unfamiliar rapid. I've also revelled in my survival when I did skroo
>up. Get a guide? Go to Disneyland! Push yer personnal limits and you
>will make mistakes.
>Since he had scouted from the Flake, and since he followed the probe
>insufficiently-critically, my bud blames himself, despite the bizarre
>"wave off" signal; he says he should have assured himself that, indeed
>he was using the right marker rock. BUT, he hasn't got a lot of
>patience for everyone who is running around clucking over this
>incident. He knows he had at least as much chance of dying in the
>Subway as I had several weeks earlier when I jammed my paddle under a
>rock near the top of Little Niagara... on the Upper Yough at ~2.3' in an open
>canoe... I could have died. Excretion occurs, folks. Deal with it.
Richard, I agree with your general statements of philosophy,
but I disagree that the Subway incident has much to do with
them.
Great Falls has been run many thousands of times over some
25 years. I am not aware of a single case prior to this
incident where a boater blindly paddled off one of the
waterfalls confident that he was safely on the standard line
when in fact he was somewhere else. Yes, there have been all
sorts of mishaps over the years, missed lines, and of course
Scott's death. But in these cases, a blown line was
recognized as such, and the boaters executed or attempted to
execute a "Plan B."
Of all the drops in Great Falls, Subway was beginning to
develop a kind of sinister mystique. Most everything else
had been run. Certainly all of the named drops. They got
bagged one by one. Chet's Choice was run. Twist and Shout
was run last year. Incidentally, both of these runs occured
after the boater in question failed to stay on his intended
line. These are nasty, rock-infested drops, but, allowing
for substantial injury, are more or less survivable.
Subway, on the other hand, always lurked as a potential
killer. It is steep, complex, boxed in, and at the bottom
much of the flow plunges under a table rock with a kind of
violence and intensity that is extreme even for Great Falls.
It's pure ugliness.
Running Subway would be analogous to boofing right at Big
Splat (while the tree was stuffed in there), or forgetting
to make your ferry at Coming Home Sweet Jesus on the Meadow,
or paddling yourself into the crack at Initiation on the
Gauley. Subway had become part of the lore at Great Falls.
To willfully paddle yourself into this chute transcends the
"shit happens" scenario by a good measure.
Oci-One Kanubi
sch...@erols.com (Paul Schelp) wrote:
> Great Falls has been run many thousands of times over some
> 25 years. I am not aware of a single case prior to this
> incident where a boater blindly paddled off one of the
> waterfalls confident that he was safely on the standard line
> when in fact he was somewhere else. Yes, there have been all
> sorts of mishaps over the years, missed lines, and of course
> Scott's death. But in these cases, a blown line was
> recognized as such, and the boaters executed or attempted to
> execute a "Plan B."
Well Paul, remember: these are Class V boaters; kinda up-an-coming Class
V boaters in two cases, but with a fair ammount of big-drop experience,
and not stupid (they are a master tradesman, a senior civil servant, and
a high-tech professional, respectively.) What they are *not* is Great
Falls regulars, like you and Big Mack. Though they all have run Great
Falls, they only boat the Potomac when there is nothing else running; by
preference they go to the mountains every weekend. I would submit that
there is a slight difference between people who are accustomed to
river-running line-picking and people who have made a lifetime study of
this one rapid (boater #2, for example, was probe at the Sinks of the
Little and at Watauga Falls, unguided, when we did those runs two years
ago. All three observed Chris Koll and Co. on the Beaver/Eagle and the
Bottom Moose before running them because the crowd was there when we
arrived, though we had to pick our own lines at Beaver/Mosher 'til we
caught the crowd at the last rapid. #2 and #3 walked Big Splat several
times before they felt they had the skill to run it. All three are
North Fork but not, I think, Upper B vets.) The point is that these are
not "memorize-the-standard-line" kinda boaters, nor are they
inexperienced idiots.
This "blown line" was certainly recognized as such by all concerned, but
only after each had made his respective run. Boater #1 made 2 mistakes:
confusing his marker rock for a similar looking rock, and not giving the
clear-cut, obvious, easily visible (from #2's position)
horizontal-paddle signal to stop. Boaters #2 & #3 made mistakes that
are far less clear-cut, which kinda boil down to trusting #1 too much.
> [snip description of the evils of Subway]
>
> To willfully paddle yourself into this chute transcends the
> "shit happens" scenario by a good measure.
It was not wilful; it was a *mistake*. #1 took the wrong line. #2 and
#3 saw #1 safely in the bottom eddy giving what looked like the standard
vertical-paddle "all clear; come ahead" signal. #1 oughta be mortified,
and I'll bet he is apologizing all over the place to #2 and #3, mostly
for the "wave-off" signal.
-Richard
Mickie
> <snip class 5 yaking experience of class 5 yakers 1,2, and 3 >
> This "blown line" was certainly recognized as such by all concerned, but
> only after each had made his respective run. Boater #1 made 2 mistakes:
> confusing his marker rock for a similar looking rock, and not giving the
> clear-cut, obvious, easily visible (from #2's position)
> horizontal-paddle signal to stop.
From Paul's original post I concluded that yakers 2 and 3 could not see
the probe. Yours clearly refutes that.
Correct me if I am wrong here Richard: Do you mean that class 5
experienced yaker (#1) did not know the universal river signals?
I am wondering too how much of an impact the combo of shock and fear (at
what he just did and what his buds were about to do) had on how he
reacted. I would think the more experienced you become, the better able
you are to react to unexpected, direful, "I cannot believe this
happening" events. You should be able to control the situation (and
that includes your self) rather than being controlled and victimized by
it. ...How experienced was yaker #1?
Just curious.
Again I am really glad that they are OK.
Mickie
KFAR...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Great Falls. I didn't see it, but a friend told me how he saw the 3
out-of-town boaters running the Spout at a level higher than it's
ordinarily run - they were banging into rocks on the way down. He was
really shaking his head about it. - KIT
> >Since he had scouted from the Flake, and since he followed the probe
> >insufficiently-critically, my bud blames himself, despite the bizarre
> >"wave off" signal; he says he should have assured himself that, indeed
> >he was using the right marker rock. BUT, he hasn't got a lot of
> >patience for everyone who is running around clucking over this
> >incident. He knows he had at least as much chance of dying in the
> >Subway as I had several weeks earlier when I jammed my paddle under a
> >rock near the top of Little Niagara... on the Upper Yough at ~2.3' in an
open
> >canoe... I could have died. Excretion occurs, folks. Deal with it.
>
> Richard, I agree with your general statements of philosophy,
> but I disagree that the Subway incident has much to do with
> them.
>
Paul Schelp
>Well Paul, remember: these are Class V boaters; kinda up-an-coming Class
>V boaters in two cases, but with a fair ammount of big-drop experience,
>and not stupid (they are a master tradesman, a senior civil servant, and
>a high-tech professional, respectively.) What they are *not* is Great
>Falls regulars, like you and Big Mack. Though they all have run Great
>Falls, they only boat the Potomac when there is nothing else running; by
>preference they go to the mountains every weekend. I would submit that
>there is a slight difference between people who are accustomed to
>river-running line-picking and people who have made a lifetime study of
Agreed. However, I think we're at a completely different
level here. My point was that running Subway willfully,
which is precisely what they did, thinking they were running
a different chute, is analagous to boofing right into the
tree at Big Splat, or willfully running straight off
Sunshine on the Narrows into the rockpile, thinking that it
was a clean line.
Regulars don't do it. Outsiders don't do it. These are
nasty, life threatening places that over the course of
thousands of runs, by all kinds of people from all over the
place, are never willfully run.
Richard, I find your contention that this event fits within
the parameters of normal class 5 exploratory boating to be
off the mark. It was a catastrophic breakdown that could
have easily led to a triple fatality and the end of legal
falls running. Let's accept that and move on, and work to
prevent a repeat.
Paul
ps: in a separate posting, Kit mentions three boaters who
had wild runs down the Spout a few weeks ago at an absurdly
high level (15,000 cfs). As crazy as that was, they
apparently scouted the line and ran it deliberately. Yes,
they did bounce down rocks, but that would be the correct
line at that level. The hole off your left elbow is far
worse. That event too is extremely unfortunate, and it too
could have resulted in multiple fatalities.
Wilko
>
> Oci-One Kanubi <richard....@erols.com> wrote:
> or willfully running straight off
> Sunshine on the Narrows into the rockpile, thinking that it
> was a clean line.
>
> Regulars don't do it. Outsiders don't do it. These are
> nasty, life threatening places that over the course of
> thousands of runs, by all kinds of people from all over the
> place, are never willfully run.
Hmmm, Leland told me that he did run the straight line at Sunshine
towards (and over) the rock at the bottom once... and yep, he ran it on
purpose and did very well, although from what he told me, the level was
right for that.
But, having said that, I wouldn't run that line for all the money in the
world.
--
Wilko van den Bergh quibus(at)xs4all(dot)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
Whitewater Kayaker AD&D Dungeon Master
------------------------------------------------------------------
I think that paddling is about fun and safety,
you shouldn't have one without the other...
------------------------------------------------------------------
(c)1999 by Wilko
Oci-One Kanubi
>
> Richard, I find your contention that this event fits within
> the parameters of normal class 5 exploratory boating to be
> off the mark. It was a catastrophic breakdown that could
> have easily led to a triple fatality and the end of legal
> falls running. Let's accept that and move on, and work to
> prevent a repeat.
Well, Shucks; I'll agree to disagree, and I'll agree that *your*
contention is in no way outrageous (I'm not calling my friends "smart"
for pulling thus stunt, eh?) I suppose that this is another area in
which thoughtful men of good intention may disagree, which suggests that
the truth may lie somewhere in between?
-Richard
Leland
>
> Paul Schelp wrote:
> >
> > Oci-One Kanubi <richard....@erols.com> wrote:
> > or willfully running straight off
> > Sunshine on the Narrows into the rockpile, thinking that it
> > was a clean line.
> >
> > Regulars don't do it. Outsiders don't do it. These are
> > nasty, life threatening places that over the course of
> > thousands of runs, by all kinds of people from all over the
> > place, are never willfully run.
>
> Hmmm, Leland told me that he did run the straight line at Sunshine
> towards (and over) the rock at the bottom once... and yep, he ran it on
> purpose and did very well, although from what he told me, the level was
> right for that.
line's clean at 100% if you have a lot of speed. cleanest run i ever
had on sunshine. it could only get better at higher water. you really
don't want to blow it, though - much like the left side boof at 100%.
lots of the standard lines on the green were first run by accident - the
launching pad at gorilla, the groove tube, etc. just because it doesn't
look like the cleanest line doesn't mean it's not.
--
Leland
lel...@home.com
http://members.home.com/lelandd
828-275-8383