On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 20:24:35 -0500, Christian T 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>he said they are only good if you ride with them in your mouth at all 
>times, because if you get hit by a slide and its not in your mouth, you're 

-- I'm pretty sure that the documented in-the-field deployments (all 
successful thus far) did not start with the mouthpiece already in the skier's 
mouth before the slide began.  (But you read the accounts on the website to 
double check this.)

> don't quote me on this but when used properly i think they add ~30-
>45 min of "extra rescue time." 

-- If deployed successfully, and the snowpack is not compressing the victim's 
chest (and no trauma of course), they buy as much time as you can stand the 
psychological trauma.  This was specifically cited in a victim’s account, 
i.e., “I’d rather die than continue being buried alive like this.”  (Meanwhile, a 
fellow client and their IFMGA guide were dead right nearby – check the 
website for the exact quote, etc.)  
– The carefully monitored BD studies had buried subjects doing fine for a long 
time.  Unfortunately, I don’t see the details at the Avalung website, but I 
recall that even after an hour or so, various real-time measures showed the 
subjects were still fine, but the tests were stopped after awhile b/c being 
buried for that long is not very pleasant for a variety of other reasons.

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 20:51:42 -0500, Nathan Bryant 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I don't see the point in the pack-integrated ones, though.

-- The main advantage is when changing layers.  So at each transition, if you 
want to add or remove a layer, you first have to remove your Avalung, and 
then put it back on after adding or removing any clothes.  With a pack-
integrated model, that’s no longer a concern.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit