
The Ortovox ZERO 27 with the 150L airbag deployed. The bag features the LiTRIC™ system developed by Ortovox and Arc’teryx.
Arc’teryx and Ortovox have joined at the hip to invest in, develop, and bring to market their proprietary airbag technology. They call it LiTRIC™.
The LiTRIC™ system relies on a supercapacitor powered by a Lithium-ion battery. Arc’teryx and Ortovox claim, once charged, the bag can be deployed twice over a roughly 60 hour period without recharging. The range of temps for activating the system and recharge fall within the acceptable ranges for skiing here on Earth: a low deployment temp of -22°F and a recharge temp of -4°F are specified.
According to a press release, the system has a product life of 50 deployments. So yes, can you practice more (and more efficiently) with a supercapacitor system. But not indefinitely.
The system weighs a reported (unverified) 2.4 lbs/1080g. The airbag volume is 150L. Pull the trigger, and “a high-performance centrifugal compressor with a compact axial diffuser fills the airbag in four seconds,” the companies state. The leg strap has a relatively new twist in that it runs between the legs, up towards the front, but connects to a reinforced point on the side of the waist belt, not the waist belt buckle. The trigger is height adjustable and easy to click into activate mode (for a pull) or nest cleanly into a neutral position to prevent accidental inflation.

The trigger handle had be swiveled easily to lock out to prevent an accidental discharge.
We’ll also have to test this in person, but it looks as if the airbag repacking protocol is simplified. Some, like me, find the usual folding process a bit like moderate Origami. Also, maybe I missed it in the product announcement video presentation, I can infill later, but I’m unsure if the avy bag system is removable from either the Ortovox or Arc’teryx series of packs.
Supercapacitor technology is not new; Alpride’s E1 uses the technology- it is licensed by several vendors, including Scott, Osprey, and Black Diamond. Next year, Alpride releases its E2 system, which will be, among others, licensed by BCA. And Arc’teryx is already in the electric airbag scene with its Voltair series.

A view of the Arc’teryx’s 32L interior. Planty of room for storage – the airbag is ready for delpoyment at the top of the main compartment.
The collaboration between these two giants and competitors is new: Canada-based Arc’teryx and German Ortovox (where the technology is manufactured) bring serious design chops to the drawing board. Ortovox has been a leader in avalanche transceiver technology since the early 1980s, while Arc’teryx has often pushed trends in the apparel space and brought cutting-edge climbing harnesses to market in the 1990s. What is also of interest, in this case, are the two discrete takes on how best to integrate the LiTRIC™ system into a ski/ride pack.
The cost is worth putting in context. None of us on the outside know the actual capital investment backcountry ski/ride companies make to develop new products. We don’t know their actual bottom line—their return on investment after a certain number of widgets are made, then sold. Avalanche airbags are expensive. So are skis, boots, and bindings, for that matter, and the prices for these items will likely rise next year. But, as we have become conditioned to pay a certain price for safety gear, say $80 for a shovel, $70 for a probe, pushing $300+ for a beacon, and the $150 range for a helmet, the cost for an avalanche airbag still shocks. Sure, some come in around the $450 mark, but paying $700 or more or breaking into the 1k range is not out of the question.
Equipment companies are not non-profits; they need to see positive ROI to remain viable. So don’t be shocked when you learn the new bags will be over $1000 with the dead bird’s packs pushing beyond the $1500 mark.

The ski carry on Arc’teryx’s 32L pack featuring the LiTRIC™ system.

We get an idea here of the leg strap that runs through the legs and attaches on the side of the wasitbelt with an easy clip-in system.
Arc’teryx
First up, Arc’teryx. Three sizes of LiTRIC™ system pack will be available next fall: a 16L, 32L, and 42L range. All three include staples like a safety tool pocket, external helmet carry, ability to carry axes. Skis need to be carried diagonally, while boards are carried vertically. The zippers are waterproof and possess that iconic, clean Arc’teryx look.
Prices:
16L – $1700
32L – $1800
42L – $1850
Ortovox
Ortovox took a different angle on pack design. They offer a fixed volume pack, the AVABAG LiTRIC ZERO, at 27 liters and 4.3 pounds. According to Ortovox, this bag is designed for day tours and includes places to externally attach axes and skis, while safety tools are secured in sleeves integrated into the pack’s main compartment. The Zero features a more minimalist waistbelt.
For those looking for pack volume options with a single LiTRIC™ system, the real buzz comes from the AVABAG LiTRIC TOUR, and AVABAG LiTRIC FREERIDE. These are modular pack systems based on back panels (bases) with interchangeable, zippered packs. The zippered-on packs include ski/board carry systems, helmet nets, and axe attachments.
The TOUR version back panel (or base) comes in a regular and a short option with the pack’s size/volume ranges available in a 28L short, 30L, 36L short, and 40L. The Tour allows for safety tool storage in a separate compartment.
The FREERIDE also comes in a regular and short back panel with the corresponding bag options: 16L short, 18L, 26 short, and 28L.
Ortovox says the FREERIDE base and the TOUR base are interchangeable (short or regular dependent) with the Tour zip-on bags or the Freeride bags. The waistbelts on both models, the FREERIDE and TOUR, are more robust than the ZERO. We’ve not seen the bags or back panels in person, so determining the real difference between the Tours and Freerides is tough to do at the moment. And, to top it off, Ortovox says the system is removable from their packs.
Prices:
ZERO: $1200
TOUR: $1300-$1400
FREERIDE: $1250-$1350
We’ll keep you updated on these packs as they continue the rollout and we’ll add overall pack weights ASAP as we’re hoping to have some testers in the next month or so.
Jason Albert comes to WildSnow from Bend, Oregon. After growing up on the East Coast, he migrated from Montana to Colorado and settled in Oregon. Simple pleasures are quiet and long days touring. His gray hair might stem from his first Grand Traverse in 2000 when rented leather boots and 210cm skis were not the speed weapons he had hoped for. Jason survived the transition from free-heel kool-aid drinker to faster and lighter (think AT), and safer, are better.
28 comments
Fifty deployments, eh? How tricky is the LiTRIC system: does it count inflations and shut down after fifty, or are the users on the honor system?
My favorite is still the Black Diamond/Pieps fan powered models that inflated then deflated after 3 minutes to give you an air pocket and potentially some room to move. I’d love them to use that concept with the new supercapacitor to make it lighter. I don’t know why they abandoned the deflation phase. It makes sense to me.
Mammut had a patent application for the self-deflating balloon concept back in ’06 but never marketed it as far as I know. At Arc’teryx we decided having your balloon deflate when you didn’t want it to (say while searching a debris field with hangfire above, or on an uptrack that fractured but hasn’t slid yet) far outweighed any theoretical scenario where you might want it to suddenly deflate. With capacitors there is also a short recharge time required, so you couldn’t re-inflate the balloon immediately if you needed to, so far better to leave it inflated.
I thought I read somewhere that the new version of the supercapicitor, E2, will be able to do the autodeflate like the BD packs. I’d love to see some of the weights and specs for the E2 packs from BCA, Scott etc.
The prices on the Arcteryx packs are predictably insane…
One area of avy pack design overlooked by many companies is fit for larger people. I went with Arva because their packs have adjustable torso lengths( straps) that fit my 6’3′ frame. I think we get tunnel vision about the technology sometimes to the detriment of fit and comfort.
Great point. It will be interesting to see how these packs fit taller frames. Curious, with the Arva, is it a single-size backpack that is adjustable, or does the frame come in specific sizes (S,M,L) each with its own respective range?
$1850 is just too much for me. If I’m deciding how to invest my money in my safety I think I’ll get a lot more value out of spending dollars on additional avalanche education. I know not everyone has to choose, but it seems like this is mostly a product for the rich kids. I hope that over time cost comes down for the rest of us.
Agreed Tom, that is expensive. Curious from a thought experiment perspective, agreeing that continuing education is critical, what might be your price threshold to enter the avy bag market? There’s certainly a range of pricing out there, but yes, the supercapacitor tech is on the more expensive side. Thanks for your comment.
I doubt it counts deployments. Those ratings are safety numbers I assume rated by worst case wear/tear on the airbag (and probably not the capacitor, motor, or other components. One wonders if a replacement bag would be possible to extend the lifespan.
Fifty is a lot more in practice than it sounds. Let’s say you do 2 test pulls a year and 1 real pull a year. That’s 16 years. Cut it back to 1 test pull a year and it’s 25 years.
Most ratings are conservative by 50-100%. (75 to 100 pulls is where they starting seeing issues).
Yes, it does count deployments. After 50 the LED indicates it should be returned for inspection. The systems are tested by TUV to 100 inflations in order to be certified for 50, but the system never stops working – wear and tear on the pack and balloon are the limiting factor.
Okay, it’s the honor system. If I spend that much on a ski pack with a fancy (yes) balloon, I want to take it to parties and let everyone try it. Spread the fun!
Would it work in outer space? Underwater? No and no. Canister packs are better in those conditions. How about in a rock avalanche? Nothing helps for that except being somewhere else.
Sarcasm aside Jim, curious if you have purchased an avy bag pack? If so, which system? If not, I’m curious if cost is a deterrent or another factor altogether?
I have not got an avy pack, Jason. Weight and cost are certainly factors. I believe it’s better to stay out of trouble. So far, I’ve been pretty successful. In the mid-fifties a cousin and I were caught in a tiny slide on Berthoud Pass from which we extricated our tiny selves. Since then neither I nor my companions have been caught or injured beyond scratches, bruises, and strained muscles
If weight and cost were not significant factors, I’d probably get an airbag just to conform. I’ve been scolded for not carrying a beacon when skiing solo — every ounce counts! Like anyone, I don’t like being scolded. So now I don’t admit to skiing solo without a beacon.
Usage note: My previous comment was not meant to be sarcastic (which are always hostile); it was meant to be humorous and to provoke irrelevant thoughts.
I dunno, call me old-school but I’ll take the reliability of a canister of compressed gas over electronic wizardry any day. Yeah- I know there are downsides (expensive to practice, travel difficulty) but if I’ve checked the gauge, I’m about 99% sure it’s going to inflate if I ever have to yank the cord. And a canister pack is less than $500 last I checked. That’s a lot of practicing at $25/fill.
(No, I don’t still use a rotary dial telephone)
I agree on the practicing, I think I only paid $15 to fill my compressed air canister. Also, with my Mammut pack, I could practice pull, without the canister in it. This was nice to practice on the ski hill, while moving.
I do not quite agree on the prices you, and others, quote for canister packs. The listed prices for canister packs do not include the canister (($170 for my Mammut one), nor the filling, as you said.
Same goes for weight.
To compare apples to apples, we need to include a full canister in the weight and cost comparison, and the AA batteries in a capacitor pack.
Still no denying that capacitor packs are more expensive than electronic packs.
It all depends on your situation. I need to fly to avalanche terrain. A few years back, I did a day of backcountry skiing while on a trip resort skiing in Winterpark. Since I couldn’t get my canister filled, I just had a heavy regular pack on my back.
If you don’t fly, and can get it filled where you ski (this also excludes any remote, less populated destinations, I think canisters are still a great option.
These dead birds can stay dead for all I care. Even the 600-800€ range is ridiculous, and there just isn’t anything in this technology (development and parts cost wise) that would justify the price gouging. Supercapacitor packs like these cost about 100€ at worst on aliexpress.
Was waiting for them to officially release this. But the packs are still heavier than canister ones and way more expensive. I just ordered one of the canister ones, I don’t see a point waiting for this to be available.
Hey Peter, curious what pack you opted for and the weight? And what is the cost for the pack in your part of Europe? Thanks for any info.
I took the Ascent 40, the big one, mainly cause we plan a hut trip in march. Complete claimed weight is 2290g, cost me a total of 710 EUR for the pack and canister. They actually went down in price a bit last week, not sure if it was cause of the new models reveal. But they already sold out the color I wanted, and also cartridges at some dealers, had to buy it at a different place.
Way more expensive, yes, by a long shot. Heavier, I’m not so sure. The Ortovox 27 liter pack is listed at 1950 grams and according to this article the Arcteryx 32 liter pack is 2090 grams. If thats correct its pretty impressive. I’m only aware of a couple cannister packs in that weight range.
https://www-freeride-se.translate.goog/litric-ny-lattare-eldriven-lavinryggsack-fran-ortovox-och-arcteryx/?_x_tr_sl=sv&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc
I think those weights are the typical airbag-weight-bullshit, where they weigh the pack without the airbag system, and the airbag system without cartridges or batteries, or with a euro only carbon cartridge.
That said, the new E2 system should be close to, or even most canister systems in weight in North America.
My beef is that most of the packs are so heavy. Multiple layers of fabric, a bazillion buckles and straps. Where are the lightweight backpacks like we see in alpine packs?
Millet had an E1 Pack in that vein, maybe they will relaunch with E2?.
As a point of comparison for balloon vs non-balloon packs, I have a CAMP Ski Raptor pack which weighs 958g or 33.8oz. It’s a 30L pack and very competent for backcountry use. That’s way lighter than any comparable airbag pack, even without its airbag stuff.
Exactly. Obviously, any airbag system is going to add weight, and you also need a bit more weight in the harness and backpanel, and add a leg loop. Still, that could be done for ~300g or less.
According to this rumor the E2 actually is heavier than the E1 although slightly larger: https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php/344751-22-23-gear-rumors/page21?p=6523329#post6523329
I think you’re misreading that. He says E2 is slightly lighter at 1140g vs E1 at 1280g, however the Scott Patrol E2 pack is apparently actually heavier than than the Scott E1 pack (presumably because the new pack is bigger, has a padded hipbelt etc). So apparently E2 is lighter than E1, but not by much.
You always need to look at the full product weight including the airbag system and the canister and the batteries or whatever the technology requires. If I look at all airbag packs sold in 2021, there´s only 5 products below 2kg! None of them with an electronical system and most of them with rather small packing volume. The Ortovox Litric Zero 27 is 1970g and electronical and the biggest volume in this category…
If I compare the Ortovox Tour 30 to all 30L volume packs with regular back length (this is the biggest category and I want to compare apples with apples) I can find only 2 (!) packs (in 2021) out of approximately 17 that are slightly lighter than the Tour 30. And again: none of the others have the additional safety margin of an electronical system…
yeah, the Zero 27 looks good, I did not really looked into that one in detail as it is too small for my needs and has a non interchangeable airbag. Can’t find the site with the Tour weights anymore, but it was cca 200g more than a canister Ascent of the same size. Plus the cost and unproven reliability.
Any news on lighter batteries for the Voltair Packs? I mean this thin is build to last but I sure would like so shave off some grams. Should be not to complicated to use the new tech for a battery that I can plug in my Voltair pack.
Comments are closed.