banff

Lo all am off to banff with a few m8s on jan 3rd can anyway 1 tell me what
the snow conditions are like at that time of year? Thanks.

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 11:05:26 GMT, "bobster"
allegedly wrote:

Lo all am off to banff with a few m8s on jan 3rd can anyway 1 tell me
what the snow conditions are like at that time of year? Thanks.

It'll be cold, followed by a warmer spell, and then cold again. There
will be some precipitation on some of the days and some of the nights as
well. Snow may be found at higher elevations, and may settle on the roads
too.

HTH

- Dave.

--
The only powder to get high on, falls from the sky.
http://www.vpas.org/ - Snowboarding the worlds pow pow.
Donek Sasquatch 162, Prior Pow 181, Burton Canyon 162

The Snowboard FAQ lives here - http://www.vpas.fsnet.co.uk/rssFAQ/

bobster wrote:
Lo all am off to banff with a few m8s on jan 3rd can anyway 1 tell me
what the snow conditions are like at that time of year? Thanks.

Depends if there's a Chinook or not - last Dec/Jan was quite warm with a
distinct lack of powder, but rideable....

bobster wrote:
Lo all am off to banff with a few m8s on jan 3rd can anyway 1 tell me what
the snow conditions are like at that time of year? Thanks.

Likely to be good, but cold.

Neil

Switters wrote:

The Snowboard FAQ lives here - http://www.vpas.fsnet.co.uk/rssFAQ/

I am neither a complete newbie nor a seasoned veteran, since I've been
snowboarding for only a few years, but even I can recognize that the
Snowboard FAQ, though very helpful overall, needs significant updating.
For example, the section on bindings (1.05.02) states: "Three types of
bindings are used in snowboarding: the high-back, plate, and the
soft-boot step-in." "High-back" is obsolete as a category name;
everyone refers to these as "strap" bindings nowadays. The term also is
potentially confusing, because nonstrap bindings also can have high
backs. The description of step-in bindings fails to note, as it
probably should, that although some riders still use step-ins, almost
no one manufactures them anymore (or is it literally no one?) Finally,
the section simply overlooks the fourth type of binding: hybrid
strap/step-ins, such as Flows or the K2 Cinch.

Another oddity I noticed is a claim in the boots section (1.05.03) that
soft boots (non-step-in) "generally are a lace up and buckle
combination." Buckles? I'm not aware of any current soft boots that use
buckles. When is the last time such boots were made?

The FAQ clearly would benefit from the attention of a good editor who
is also an experienced rider.

Joe Ramirez

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 02:06:32 GMT, allegedly
wrote:

I am neither a complete newbie nor a seasoned veteran, since I've been
snowboarding for only a few years, but even I can recognize that the
Snowboard FAQ, though very helpful overall, needs significant updating.

Thanks for the input. I tend to do most of the reviewing and editing in
the bad autumnal weather, or over the winter, especially when waiting at
airports. Since I'm now kitesurfing in the nasty windy rain, rather than
sat on my butt in front of the computer, I've had less time to do this.

Your points are noted though, and I'll review the sections as soon as I
can. Feel free to make further observations.

- Dave.

--
The only powder to get high on, falls from the sky.
http://www.vpas.org/ - Snowboarding the worlds pow pow.
Donek Sasquatch 162, Prior Pow 181, Burton Canyon 162

The Snowboard FAQ lives here - http://www.vpas.fsnet.co.uk/rssFAQ/

Switters wrote:
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 02:06:32 GMT, allegedly
wrote:

I am neither a complete newbie nor a seasoned veteran, since I've been
snowboarding for only a few years, but even I can recognize that the
Snowboard FAQ, though very helpful overall, needs significant updating.

Thanks for the input. I tend to do most of the reviewing and editing in
the bad autumnal weather, or over the winter, especially when waiting at
airports. Since I'm now kitesurfing in the nasty windy rain, rather than
sat on my butt in front of the computer, I've had less time to do this.

Your points are noted though, and I'll review the sections as soon as I
can. Feel free to make further observations.

Well, a general problem is that many parts of the FAQ betray its age as
a document that was first drafted in 1990. That was a generation ago in
human terms, and many generations ago in snowboard terms. The target
audience for any FAQ should be a present-day newbie -- in this case, a
neophyte snowboarder in the 2006-07 season. Ideally, if someone had the
time and inclination, the entire FAQ would be reviewed from that
perspective. Anything unhelpful or confusing to a contemporary newbie
would be rewritten or simply scrapped.

Some more specific examples:
-The "Old School" vs. "New School" discussion (1.17) seems very dated
and probably should be deleted, or else abridged and moved to the
history section (1.04).
-I would bet that the material on stance angles (1.06.01) does not
accurately reflect the current prevalence of duck stances among today's
pro freestyle riders. New data is probably needed.
-The list of boarding web sites (1.22) could be greatly expanded. There
are many more sites out there now than at the time this section of the
FAQ was written.
-The wide board list (1.07.02) needs to be updated to reflect current
models. For example, the Ride Mountain should be deleted and the Ride
Fleetwood added.
-Section 1.05 notes, "The boards, boots and binding styles sold in the
mid-eighties aren't even available today." Well, of course not --
because this is 2006! This sentence is clearly a leftover from a very
old version of the FAQ.
-In sec. 1.09, the reference to the 2002-03 season should be updated to
2006-07.
-Section 1.21 ("What happened to the numbers that began with 8?") is
meaningless to your target audience because they weren't around to read
a much earlier version of the FAQ. This section could safely be
deleted.

Similar observations probably could be made about other sections, but I
don't have time at present to go through the entire FAQ systematically.
I hope this critique doesn't seem too nitpicky. Actually, I think the
FAQ is in decent shape for a document that's been around since 1990 and
has been worked on only periodically by volunteers. It takes a good
amount of work and vigilance to keep material like this current. You
update a "1998" reference to "2002," and the next thing you know it's
2006! Thanks for taking care of it.

Joe Ramirez

wrote:
Switters wrote:
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 02:06:32 GMT, allegedly
wrote:

I am neither a complete newbie nor a seasoned veteran, since I've been
snowboarding for only a few years, but even I can recognize that the
Snowboard FAQ, though very helpful overall, needs significant updating.

Thanks for the input. I tend to do most of the reviewing and editing in
the bad autumnal weather, or over the winter, especially when waiting at
airports. Since I'm now kitesurfing in the nasty windy rain, rather than
sat on my butt in front of the computer, I've had less time to do this.

Your points are noted though, and I'll review the sections as soon as I
can. Feel free to make further observations.

Well, a general problem is that many parts of the FAQ betray its age as
a document that was first drafted in 1990. That was a generation ago in
human terms, and many generations ago in snowboard terms. The target
audience for any FAQ should be a present-day newbie -- in this case, a
neophyte snowboarder in the 2006-07 season. Ideally, if someone had the
time and inclination, the entire FAQ would be reviewed from that
perspective. Anything unhelpful or confusing to a contemporary newbie
would be rewritten or simply scrapped.

Some more specific examples:
-The "Old School" vs. "New School" discussion (1.17) seems very dated
and probably should be deleted, or else abridged and moved to the
history section (1.04).
-I would bet that the material on stance angles (1.06.01) does not
accurately reflect the current prevalence of duck stances among today's
pro freestyle riders. New data is probably needed.
-The list of boarding web sites (1.22) could be greatly expanded. There
are many more sites out there now than at the time this section of the
FAQ was written.
-The wide board list (1.07.02) needs to be updated to reflect current
models. For example, the Ride Mountain should be deleted and the Ride
Fleetwood added.
-Section 1.05 notes, "The boards, boots and binding styles sold in the
mid-eighties aren't even available today." Well, of course not --
because this is 2006! This sentence is clearly a leftover from a very
old version of the FAQ.
-In sec. 1.09, the reference to the 2002-03 season should be updated to
2006-07.
-Section 1.21 ("What happened to the numbers that began with 8?") is
meaningless to your target audience because they weren't around to read
a much earlier version of the FAQ. This section could safely be
deleted.

Similar observations probably could be made about other sections, but I
don't have time at present to go through the entire FAQ systematically.
I hope this critique doesn't seem too nitpicky. Actually, I think the
FAQ is in decent shape for a document that's been around since 1990 and
has been worked on only periodically by volunteers. It takes a good
amount of work and vigilance to keep material like this current. You
update a "1998" reference to "2002," and the next thing you know it's
2006! Thanks for taking care of it.

Joe Ramirez

Joe brings up a lot of good points. While the FAQ has a lot of good
info, it still has a little bit of stale stuff as well. I guess we
should use this thread (and all the spare time we have before the
season) to chip and make it better! Here are my thoughts for a few
changes

1.05.01 - What are the various types of boards?

My suggestion is make the list be Freestyle, Freeride (All-mountain),
Alpine as the main variants. Swallowtails and Splitboards (does anyone
go backcountry and not ride powder?) should go with Pintails under
"Powder boards" Race goes under Alpine and Boardercross goes between
Freeride and Alpine.

Current description of "alpine" tells you very little about what the
actual board is and why would anyone would ride one. Saying that it is
"a little more common" in Europe is a euphemism for saying it is very
rare in North America. Less than 1% of riders are alpine riders. It has
seen a resurgence with the advent of the internet and renewed interest
following the 2006 Olympic Winter Games.

1.06.01 - What is the right stance (width and angles) for me?
I think another option for "rail rider" shoudl be added as they ride
with big duck angles the most and they are the newest, quickest grow
group of proriders

1.07.01 - I've got big feet, do I need a wide board?

"3)" about hardboots should be removed since most people ride hardboots
with alpine board and so board width is still somewhat of an issue for
people with big feet.

1.08 - What is all this weird talk I hear from boarders?

Aerial manoeuvres (sp?) - sidekick, heel/toe-edge grab are archaic, as
are Slob Air, Canadian bacon, Nuclear, and J-tear.

Baseless Binding - delete or move to history

Bladder and shell - Liner and outer shell

Inserts - description implies this is a "new" style of attaching
bindings to boards, T-nuts are long gone

New-School/Old-school - delete or move to history

Retention Plate - remove

Shred - :P

1.13 - Why is there friction between skiers and boarders? Also get ride
of the skiing vs snowboard friction (or move to history)

1.21 - What happened to the numbers that began with 8?

I've been snowboarding for over a decade and this is before my time.

2.01 - What sort of radio can I use to keep in touch with people?

Most people use cellphones now (for better or worse) with FRS/GMRS
still giving a good showing.

Thanks Joe and Arvin... I've archived the posts locally and will review
and update as soon as I can, preferably before it gets cold and the new
season of newbies turns up on the group.

- Dave.

--
The only powder to get high on, falls from the sky.
http://www.vpas.org/ - Snowboarding the worlds pow pow.
Donek Sasquatch 162, Prior Pow 181, Burton Canyon 162

The Snowboard FAQ lives here - http://www.vpas.fsnet.co.uk/rssFAQ/

wrote:

-The wide board list (1.07.02) needs to be updated to reflect current
models. For example, the Ride Mountain should be deleted and the Ride
Fleetwood added.

I'm replying to my own post to add something on this topic that I
forgot. I think the wide board discussion also should include a couple
of general points that can help people looking for a wide board:
1. In addition to "dedicated" wide boards, e.g., the Ride Yukon, some
manufacturers make wide versions of their standard boards, but usually
only in certain lengths. These are normally indicated by a "W" after
the number. For example, the Ride Decade comes in lengths 146, 151,
156, 158W, 160, 162W, 164, and 165W. If you want the wide version you
must choose the length that fits you best.
2. Freeride boards are more likely to come in wide versions than
freestyle boards. Dedicated wide boards are more likely to be intended
for freeriding or all-mountain use than for pure freestyle riding.

It might be worth mentioning "mid-wide" boards too, just so readers are
aware the category exists.

Joe Ramirez