Big picture, transceivers, probes, shovels aren’t what keep us safe while ski touring. Good decision making keeps us safe.
Expecting the unexpected—Avalanche transceivers are safety gear we rely on, yet, with increasing frequency, newer iterations are recalled. Here are some thoughts on that dynamic.
I was surprised that I wasn’t surprised Thursday morning when alerted to the latest avalanche transceiver recall. Black Diamond Equipment recalled their new Pieps Pro IPS transceiver for potential issues with the battery compartment dimensions and using slightly smaller batteries than standard dimensions. In instances where the unit is jarred, the unit may either not turn on or, if already on, turn off.
Here in the U.S., we have a robust system for recalling products administered by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Although we won’t pivot and discuss the recall/voluntary recall process here, if you have been in the backcountry scene for a year or a decade, you know avalanche safety product recalls aren’t uncommon. For example, in the past few weeks, Barryvox issued a voluntary recall for their new Barryvox S2 and Barryvox 2 transceivers. We’ll get to this later in this download, but most, if not all, companies involved in developing and manufacturing transceivers have issued a recall/voluntary recall. BD/Pieps is not alone. Yet, they are alone regarding botched recalls, real physical consequences, poor spin, poor optics, and deviating from serving the community when they recalled many units a few years back.
In the case of the Pro IPS or Barryvox S2/S, is it safe to say lessons have been learned, and companies are incentivized to get way ahead of any potential recall by using our new sniff test? A test where a company initiates a recall at the slightest whiff of a possible malfunction. (In my eyes, this is not such a bad thing.) Monday-morning-quarterbacking on this Friday morning, the respective recalls were issued relatively quickly.
From an engineering and manufacturing perspective, considering the extensive quality control companies surely run prototyped and final iteration products through, it’s difficult to understand why we have what feels like all too frequent recalls regarding avalanche safety gear. Granted, transceivers, for example, involve complex engineering, and scaled manufacturing involves overseas production and reliance on outsourcing to keep costs reasonable. All those complexities can compound. Problems arise.
Nothing is perfect. But safety gear should land on perfect, with the occasional blip here and there, considering the issues noted above. Let’s not mince words: If I am using safety gear in the backcountry, I trust I (and my partners) know how to use the gear, and it will function properly 100% of the time.
Searching the CPSC Database
A search on the CPSC site reveals these historic recalls for avalanche safety gear. I used several search terms, all of which rendered the same results. I’ll list them out chronologically.
Jan 2005: Climb High Inc. Announce Recall of Avalanche Transceivers—problem with waterproof plastic casing.
Sept. 2005: Ortovox Recalls M1 and M2 Avalanche Transceivers—”batteries in these devices can become dislodged when the transceiver is struck sharply.”
Jan. 2011: Black Diamond Recalls Avalung backpacks—”The air intake tubing can crack under cold temperatures, causing the unit not to function as intended, posing a suffocation hazard.”
Aug. 2013: Snowpulse Avalanche airbags with inflation-system 1.0 air cartridges recall—” The metal cartridge is inside the pack and unscrews from the airbag.”
Nov. 2013: BCA recalls avalanche airbags—” The trigger assembly can fail resulting in the airbag not deploying…”
May 2015: Mountain Safety Research (MSR) recalls avalanche rescue snow shovel—” The lower lock button on the avalanche snow shovel’s shaft can fail to secure the blade…”
June 2015: Ortovox recalls S1+ avalanche transceiver—” The S1+ hardware can fail, resulting in an inability to transmit a discoverable signal during an emergency situation, even as the unit appears to be powered on and functioning properly.”
July 2015: Black Diamond recalls Jetforce avalanche airbag packs—” The motor can malfunction and prevent the airbag from deploying…”
May 2016: Cascade Designs recalls avalanche rescue probe—” The lock button on the probe can fail to engage and lock, causing the probe not to function as intended.”
July 2018: Ortovox recalls specific runs of S3+ avalanche transceivers—” The transceiver can fail to work properly due to a software error and fail to transmit the position of survivors of an avalanche…”
April 2021: Black Diamond Recalls PIEPS DSP Avalanche Transceivers Due to Risk of Loss of Emergency Communications; One Death Reported—” The transceiver can switch modes unexpectedly when not locked or installed in the harness. When this occurs, it will prevent the transceiver from transmitting a signal and can make it difficult to locate a skier in an avalanche…”
June 2022: Elevate Outdoor Collective Recalls Backcountry Access Avalanche Transceivers [Tracker 4] Due to Risk of Loss of Emergency Communications—”The toggle switch can separate from the transceiver, and prevent the transceiver from switching to search mode, making it difficult to locate a skier in an avalanche…”
July 2022: Black Diamond Equipment Recalls PIEPS and Black Diamond Avalanche Transceivers Due to Risk of Loss of Emergency Communications—”The recalled transceivers may not switch from SEND mode into SEARCH mode. If this were to occur, the device would not be able to locate a skier in an avalanche…”
Feb. 2023: Klim Backcountry recalls A300 avalanche probe— “The recalled probes can fail to operate when deployed by rescuers…”
April 2023: Mammut recalls Alugator Ride 3.0 Hoe and Alugator Ride SE avalanche shovels—” The spring locking mechanism on the recalled avalanche shovels can fail in an emergency excavation of a person buried by an avalanche…”
April 2023: Black Diamond Equipment Recalls Recon LT Avalanche Transceivers Due to Risk of Loss of Emergency Communication—”The recalled transceivers can unexpectedly enter search mode due to interference from other beacons. If this occurs, the device could fail to transmit the position of survivors of an avalanche, resulting in delayed search and rescue operations..”
Moving Forward
Although I have had zero problems with my transceiver since I purchased it five-plus years ago, according to the literature, I’m due for a transceiver refresh. I have good options, with tried and true units offering essential functions.
Part of me also exists in an ideal world where I want the few companies investing in and producing avalanche safety gear to pool their resources, know-how, and expertise and develop bomb-proof products. I don’t know how this would look. Does an entity like the UIAA become the umbrella under which companies knowledge-share, tinker, and find solutions?
“Overall, recalls of the gear we rely on for avalanche safety are infrequent. The probes work. The shovels do their job. The transceivers, most often, are dialed. But not always. Although small, a degree of uncertainty and a lack of trust in our transceivers have arisen. And that, with 100% certainty, is not a good thing.”
I don’t necessarily need a safety tool branded by this or that company. I need a safety tool that works. Yet, maximizing profits is a tricky thing. There has to be return on investment. Companies in the business of selling goods cannot lose money selling what they produce. I learned this in fourth grade when my class incorporated and created a semi-viable holiday card company. (Thank you parents for making us semi-viable.) However, as consumers of devices designed and marketed to save our lives, it’s reasonable to expect these tools to be approaching fail-proof. What is clear to me is that no company is immune to product failure. The CPSC query shows me that. The one exception is ARVA. I may be missing something, but so far, I’ve been unable to find instances of their safety products being recalled.
There are upsides. Overall, recalls of the gear we rely on for avalanche safety are infrequent. The probes work. The shovels do their job. The transceivers, most often, are dialed. But not always. Although small, a degree of uncertainty and a lack of trust in our transceivers have arisen. And that, with 100% certainty, is not a good thing.
Big picture, transceivers, probes, shovels aren’t what keep us safe while ski touring. Good decision making keeps us safe. While there is an onus on brands to have a 100% reliable safety product, these things are complex, and mistakes happen. Any number of scenarios could break or detach us from our transceiver, break a shovel or probe, cause our airbags to fail to deploy. While I’m not advocating for use of a known, flawed product, we should treat these devices as failable.
