Standardised Avalanche ReportsMichael Staudinger, LWZ - Salzburg

Do back country skiers understand the avalanche report in the way the producers intend that?

Result: Yes and No !!!

2/3 can reproduce the danger level correctly.

but:

2/3 are not able to quote the additional information in the avalanche reports correctly.

Standardised Layout:

New concepts and icons need time that people get used to them.

They only work if they are standardised across the Alps.

Once reports are standardised, a large synergy potential becomes available.

(example of the European danger scale)

wet + dry aval. seperately

Bavaria:

history of danger level

Austria

Tirol:time developmentmoning – afternoon

morning afternoon 1 a

DAV –Piktogramme

(user representatives)

all information pictogrammed!

DAV - Symbols

Amount of information > > > >

Pyramid of informaton:penetration depth > >

>

danger level

Texts:1. Avalanche danger 2. Snow cover3. Weather

user knowledge today:

2/3

1/3

3danger degree

Headline + Symbol+ subline

user knowledge tomorrow:

2/3

1/3 >> 2/3

¼ >> 2/3 !!

greenhorn

Texte:1. Avalanche danger2. Snow cover3. Weather4. Tendency

Web 2006:

Conclusion of the working group on avalanche report(Meeting October 2006):

too little remains in the memory of the users of the avalanche reports

Transport more than only danger degrees!

1. Standardised graphical concepts2. Standardised small pakets of digestable informationen

(sublines with 3 lines – english??)3. Standardised contents (and order of the different elements)

Conclusion:Standardised (Glossar) graphical concepts (icons):

aspects ***

time development ***

elevation ***

regional danger levels ** (decided by regional aval. service

Graphical concept (conclusion of the working group meeting)

Graphical Solution:

Graphical Solutions:

am + pm

am pm

Graphical Solutions (example Salzburg):

Graphical Solutions (example Salzburg

Graphical Solutions (example Salzburg):