Cell phone range is about one mile. most true woodlands and mountain ranges don't even have people every mile, let alone a cell phone tower. More like every 10 to 100 miles. In some areas out West it's several hundred miles.
Last edited:
Another one who didn't listen
- Thread starter Toddy
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
Cell phone range is about one mile. most true woodlands and mountain ranges don't even have people every mile, let alone a cell phone tower. More like every 10 to 100 miles. In some areas out West it's several hundred miles.
Lots of fell runners are very experienced hill folk. You won't see them wearing boots - trainers (albeit fell ones!) every time. I think boots are a lot more clumsy than fell shoes, especially when tired.
As for phone reception, I can rarely get a signal in upper wharfedale!
As for phone reception, I can rarely get a signal in upper wharfedale!
I wish we had decent phone reception where I live - none at home, none in my favourite camping spots (any of them, bar one) none at the Moot ... oh hang on ... I am glad that there is no mobile signal in these places!
Back to the main thrust of the thread ...
Some folk are so poorly educated in hill safety that they truely belive that the Nanny State is able to ensure their safety no matter what and that they have a right to go out and do anything they want.
The National Press (OK it was the Daily Wail, AKA "The Hate Mail", AKA "The Daily Male") had a photo of a woman walking up Snowdon in the snow - wearing 4" heels!
IMHO if you know the risks involved in hillwalking, if you do your best to accomodate those risks (knowledge of hill craft, wearing clothing suitable for the conditions, carrying suitable kit and knowing how to use it etc) then if things go pear shaped and you need to be rescued for whatever reason you have at least made an honest attempt to be self reliant.
If you bimble into situations in ignorance, with out preparation, kit, clothing etc then those who come to pick up the pieces (in their own time, often at personal expense) are entitled to call you an idiot!
Phones are not a reliable "get out of jail free" card!
I haven't been on a call for a fell runner but I have discussed them with the guys who have. They are more prone to ankle injury than a hill walker because they are running and don't have the ankle support provided by boots. When they do go down it can be a very serious situation as they carry almost no equipment or clothing as they want to keep the weight down. Typically, they have as little some water, an energy bar and a foil blanket. Considering they're cooling rapidly after exercise, their location, duration of rescue and other factors they are just as much at risk of developing hypothermia and serious injury as an inexperienced hill walker.
Clearly therefore all fell runners are idiots and fools, and should be banned from the hills immediately. Furthermore they should pay all the costs of recovery, including their hospital bills. In fact, make fell-running a criminal offense, with serious jail time.
We'll all be much safer then................................................................
There's the line; the hills are enjoyed by a huge range of people with a huge range of fitnesses and abilities.
All that was asked was that a little forethought and preparation was taken before venturing out, in the middle of Winter, late on in the day, improperly dressed for the activity.
That's it, and all those who are cavilling can let their bellies rumble for their speech all they like; it's not changing the reality of the situation.
The fellow in the OP was not properly prepared for the weather, the site, or the conditions. The MR team leader said so publically in the (apparantly forlorn) hope that others might pay attention and not be so glaikit.
A mobile phone is an incredibly useful tool, but the fellow they rescued dropped his when he fell. If the MR team leader hadn't been on the ball and really known his area, then the most likely scenario would have been that the man would have died of exposure before they could find him...........and some of you persist in wittering on about bans, and criminal actions......no one in the MR has asked for that, and I certainly didn't. The team leader involved in this rescue didn't, so why are those of you who are niggling persistantly bringing it up ? Do you somehow want the whole outdoors licenced ?
total overkill....see the Clyde effect in an earlier post.
Not one of us wants access to the hills restricted, all that's being asked is the judicious application of a little common sense
Toddy
All that was asked was that a little forethought and preparation was taken before venturing out, in the middle of Winter, late on in the day, improperly dressed for the activity.
That's it, and all those who are cavilling can let their bellies rumble for their speech all they like; it's not changing the reality of the situation.
The fellow in the OP was not properly prepared for the weather, the site, or the conditions. The MR team leader said so publically in the (apparantly forlorn) hope that others might pay attention and not be so glaikit.
A mobile phone is an incredibly useful tool, but the fellow they rescued dropped his when he fell. If the MR team leader hadn't been on the ball and really known his area, then the most likely scenario would have been that the man would have died of exposure before they could find him...........and some of you persist in wittering on about bans, and criminal actions......no one in the MR has asked for that, and I certainly didn't. The team leader involved in this rescue didn't, so why are those of you who are niggling persistantly bringing it up ? Do you somehow want the whole outdoors licenced ?
total overkill....see the Clyde effect in an earlier post.Not one of us wants access to the hills restricted, all that's being asked is the judicious application of a little common sense
Toddy
Where would we be without risk?
After all if you free climb to the top of a public school clock tower to carve your initials and are successful then you are on the road to being a hero. What would the opinion be if you had to be rescued or were caught in the act?
After all if you free climb to the top of a public school clock tower to carve your initials and are successful then you are on the road to being a hero. What would the opinion be if you had to be rescued or were caught in the act?
Thank you for reading my mind and adding the thoughts I dare not utter!
It's not my place to stop anyone running the hills. If they want to that's fine, I have no problem with it. All I was doing was pointing out that although many fell runners are experienced hill walkers (there are a couple in our MRT) they choose to take minimal equipment to cut down on weight. That is their choice. However, if they end up in a dangerous situation that lack of equipment puts them at higher risk than someone who is carrying an extra couple of pounds of gear. Again, this is their choice and I respect that.
At no time would I suggest forming legislation to restrict that, or banning people from the hills. No, once again IT IS THEIR CHOICE.
Would I do that? Nope, I wouldn't. That's MY choice.
However, I have some freedom of speech and, just as I respect the rights of a fell runner or any other ill-equipped person, I have the right to express my opinion.
Idiots and fools? Not really.
Liable for their choices? Definitely.
I think we're saying the same thing from different directions John. No "Phones are not a 'get out of jail free card.' " But when the majority come to rely on them (and the organized rescue services) as such they become the new "normal." We can try to educate but I'm afraid we're losing ground.
I have a feeling my irony button was in overdrive somehow But this insane desire on the part of government agencies worldwide (often as a knee-jerk reaction to "public concerns") to legislate all risks out of life does tend to wind me up sometimes!
I used to do a lot of sailing, and one of my favourite reads was about a guy in a home-made plywood boat sailing one and a half times around the world (forgotten the book title now, but I'll try to remember and post references). If he tried that now, he'd be arrested if he stopped in France because his boat didn't have a Category A offshore rating......
Sure, the guy was ill-advised to do what he did in this particular instance, and was lucky to survive. But please lets not get all hot and bothered about it - the press is more than capable of doing just that, and before you know it all sorts of restrictions will be brought in as a result. And does anyone REALLY want that?
But this insane desire on the part of government agencies worldwide (often as a knee-jerk reaction to "public concerns") to legislate all risks out of life does tend to wind me up sometimes!I used to do a lot of sailing, and one of my favourite reads was about a guy in a home-made plywood boat sailing one and a half times around the world (forgotten the book title now, but I'll try to remember and post references). If he tried that now, he'd be arrested if he stopped in France because his boat didn't have a Category A offshore rating......
Sure, the guy was ill-advised to do what he did in this particular instance, and was lucky to survive. But please lets not get all hot and bothered about it - the press is more than capable of doing just that, and before you know it all sorts of restrictions will be brought in as a result. And does anyone REALLY want that?
Oops, I don't think I got the joke! Sorry Andy, it's been a long week (even though it's only Tuesday!) and I've already had an interesting discussion about this with someone else.I have a feeling my irony button was in overdrive somehow
Just remembered the boat - Shrimpy - an 18 ft Caprice yacht sailed round the world by Shane Acton. Anyone wants a good read, suggest the book (called "Shrimpy" I think......) ah yes - http://www.upbiz.com/penryn/ballerina/shrimpy.html
Just loved this extract from the website...(wonder what elf and safety would make of this )
Length of voyage: 30,000 miles approx. Duration: 8 years. Cost of navigational gear, etc 50 pounds; Amount of previous sailing knowledge: Nil. Funds available for voyage: 30 puunds. Legs: The Atlantic (Canaries-Barbados) 40 days; the Pacific (Galapagos-Marquesas_ 45 days; the Indian Ocean (Malaysia-Ski Lanka) 10 days; the Indian Ocean (India-French Somaliland) 28 days. Pleasure gained: Incalculable.
Just loved this extract from the website...(wonder what elf and safety would make of this
)Length of voyage: 30,000 miles approx. Duration: 8 years. Cost of navigational gear, etc 50 pounds; Amount of previous sailing knowledge: Nil. Funds available for voyage: 30 puunds. Legs: The Atlantic (Canaries-Barbados) 40 days; the Pacific (Galapagos-Marquesas_ 45 days; the Indian Ocean (Malaysia-Ski Lanka) 10 days; the Indian Ocean (India-French Somaliland) 28 days. Pleasure gained: Incalculable.
Last edited:
And another from overseas
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/illinois-man-sons-die-hiking-missouri-18211670 sad, tragic and annoying. My thoughts are with the families of all involved.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/illinois-man-sons-die-hiking-missouri-18211670 sad, tragic and annoying. My thoughts are with the families of all involved.
You can all rant as much as you like , education is the key . This lucky fella has learned a good lesson, hopefully. If we were perfect we would not need saving from ourselves . I'd like to point out free climbers , we all know this is extremely risky and base jumpers .I could go on,I think you get the point . Don't worry about the rescuers, it was good practice for them and they love to help others . Well done lads :You_Rock_
A very interesting post indeed, I myself when younger have done some real foolish things whilst out & about in the Countryside. Gotten away with most of them too then never think of them again. If this irresponsible guy had made it back down without a scratch would he be considered a hero/idiot & by whom because he would slip into invisibility when no one would know of him. Yes its stupid to do what hie did was he alone or with a group this would make it more idiotic. By having the right kit and equipment does this give us the right to being rescued without ridicule. We talk of survival situations as such, this guy would have been classed as a hero if he had went to get help for someone else who had been injured in his trainers. Always will have for & against.
