Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 135 posts

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#61

Post by justinator »

ryannevius wrote: post #25

It's unfortunate that world-class alpinists such as Kilian Jornet -- who recently summited Everest solo, in 26 hours, without supplemental oxygen, after training his ass off for years [1] -- won't be able to attempt such a challenge again (unless I'm missing something). There has to be a better solution to the problem mentioned in the article. [1] https://www.outsideonline.com/2187266/kilian-jornet-summits-...

Jornet summited from the Chinese side, so this ban wouldn't have made much difference.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#62

Post by bhickey »

newfoundglory wrote: post #56
bhickey wrote: post #21

I'd rather see Nepal ban fixed ropes and yank the ladder off the Hillary Step, but that'd kill the whole industry.

I thought the Hillary Step was gone now.

Looks like it: https://www.outsideonline.com/2191911/american-climbers-conf...

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#63

Post by matt-attack »

harigov wrote: post #36
__s wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but the same people who argue for that liberty also ask govt to go search when someone goes missing in the mountains It's two distinct groups. If there is overlap there'll likely be ideas like fining someone after a rescue unless they have insurance, & then leaving it up to insurance companies to decide about solo climber coverage

Good point. My point is that some people don't think about the consequences of what they are asking for, unless prompted for it, and they usually have ideas that are contradictory. Of course, your point still stands and I agree alternatives should be considered as well. However, I am still in support of forcing people to go in groups because it is safer. I don't have data, but I do believe from experience that there…

Regarding people not thinking about the consequences, I’d say that mistake typically falls in lawmakers. Lawmaker: “hmm, motorcyclists without helmets put too much of a financial burden on hospitals, so let’s outlaw helmetless riding.” Instead of infringing on civil liberties why not target the problem at hand? Mandate specific insurance, or self-insurance, etc. in order to ride in that manner.

Same could be said here. If there is a specific financial bidder you’re trying to solve, then create a focused law that specifically aims to resolve the point at hand. I really hate these broad-stroke lazy regulations. I’d like to think professional lawmakers would be experts at this.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#64

Post by paulcole »

justinator wrote: post #60
paulcole wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like there’s doubts that Kilian submitted at all. Personally, I think he did, but as of now there’s really no proof. http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8591724 Edit: Why downvote this? Is there any evidence Kilian submitted beyond his word?

Jornet isn't just some random wahoo. He's won pretty much every major ultra trail race there is, has an unparalleled race ski mountaineering career, and FKTs on other major Seven Summits, including Denali. He's an outlier''s outlier. What then, does he need to prove? What would the reason be for him to lie?

>What then, does he need to prove?

That he has been to the summit.

Just for the sake of argument, the reason is pretty obvious: sponsor pressure. You think Salomon is ponying up for him to get to 28,500 and then turn back?

Also, didn’t Kilian get DQed for cutting switchbacks in a race after being told repeatedly to knock it off? I know he’s a beast and GOAT but he’s still human.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#65

Post by droithomme »

harigov wrote: post #2

As someone with some mountaineering experience in North America, I am really surprised to hear that they ever allowed this in the first place. Of course, one could argue that govt shouldn't have any power over what an individual can do, but the same people who argue for that liberty also ask govt to go search when someone goes missing in the mountains. And you can only search for so many people. I think it is reasona…

> the same people who argue for that liberty also ask govt to go search when someone goes missing in the mountains

You posit a valuable and worthwhile hypothesis. I would appreciate it if you could show conclusive evidence that any solo climber of Everest who died requested as you claim that "government go search" when they went missing. Thank you.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#66

Post by harigov »

droithomme wrote: post #65
harigov wrote: post #2

As someone with some mountaineering experience in North America, I am really surprised to hear that they ever allowed this in the first place. Of course, one could argue that govt shouldn't have any power over what an individual can do, but the same people who argue for that liberty also ask govt to go search when someone goes missing in the mountains. And you can only search for so many people. I think it is reasona…

> the same people who argue for that liberty also ask govt to go search when someone goes missing in the mountains You posit a valuable and worthwhile hypothesis. I would appreciate it if you could show conclusive evidence that any solo climber of Everest who died requested as you claim that "government go search" when they went missing. Thank you.

I guess I wasn't clear. I didn't mean that the people who are climbing are the ones who are asking govt to go search for them if them go missing. I am talking about people, who in general ask for liberty in such matters while also asking govt to provide search and rescue operations to deal with any fallouts. I am sure you would ask me for data to show conclusive evidence of this happening and my answer is that I have none.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#67

Post by bunderbunder »

justinator wrote: post #60
paulcole wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like there’s doubts that Kilian submitted at all. Personally, I think he did, but as of now there’s really no proof. http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8591724 Edit: Why downvote this? Is there any evidence Kilian submitted beyond his word?

Jornet isn't just some random wahoo. He's won pretty much every major ultra trail race there is, has an unparalleled race ski mountaineering career, and FKTs on other major Seven Summits, including Denali. He's an outlier''s outlier. What then, does he need to prove? What would the reason be for him to lie?

> What would the reason be for him to lie?

Just taking a wild stab at it, avoiding embarrassment and maintaining his reputation. I know literally nothing about him, but I presume he's every bit as human as the rest of us.

I'm absolutely not trying to weigh in either way - again, I know literally nothing about him. But also I don't think past accomplishment can be used as such handy proof of subsequent accomplishments.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#68

Post by sus_007 »

cyberferret wrote: post #3

I can understand a persons willingness to 'push the envelope' and stretch themselves to reach their goals, but I am always mystified by the seeming lack of understanding by those who try and tackle Everest when they are not at peak climbing ability. In almost every case, it is the local Sherpas who will have to then risk their own lives to undertake a rescue or recovery operation if you don't make it. Plus, I would h…

Despite living close to the Sagarmatha (equivalent of Everest in Nepali) region, I myself haven't even dared thinking about giving it a try(not that I can't afford it). The mere suggestion of “conquering Everest” sounds ridiculous. Having conversed with few of them I've realized that many climbers do in fact posses this mentality, and while that may be fine for them, I personally believe that the true beauty in climbing is the experience – both in appreciating nature’s wonder while challenging yourself physically in new ways and to your personal limits. While reaching the top of mountains can be an exhilarating experience, irrational obsession with summiting (also called Summit Fever) can be deadly. So what is my point? It is my opinion that for most people attempting to climb to the summit of Mt. Everest is simply dumb.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#69

Post by vidarh »

sandworm101 wrote: post #55
cyberferret wrote: post #3

I can understand a persons willingness to 'push the envelope' and stretch themselves to reach their goals, but I am always mystified by the seeming lack of understanding by those who try and tackle Everest when they are not at peak climbing ability. In almost every case, it is the local Sherpas who will have to then risk their own lives to undertake a rescue or recovery operation if you don't make it. Plus, I would h…

I wouldn't blame the mountain. It isn't dangerous anymore, not like it once was. Modern climbing is extraordinarily safe. We now have gear that we can actually trust. Ropes are now basically magic. But more importantly, modern communications and weather forecasting mean climbers no longer need step into the void . Dangers that were once total unknowns are now calculable. It is much easier to be bold when you know wha…

Part of the issue is that people seek out risk. If something is made safer, people will not go "great, no we're not taking any risks" - they will seek out something riskier.

Peoples individual risk tolerance varies, but we all tend to have a tendency to see a reduced risk as a reason to push things further.

This gives rise to the situation where if we make changes that are perceived as adding more safety than it actually does, we even risk actually causing more injury than we prevent

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#70

Post by GuB-42 »

ryannevius wrote: post #25

It's unfortunate that world-class alpinists such as Kilian Jornet -- who recently summited Everest solo, in 26 hours, without supplemental oxygen, after training his ass off for years [1] -- won't be able to attempt such a challenge again (unless I'm missing something). There has to be a better solution to the problem mentioned in the article. [1] https://www.outsideonline.com/2187266/kilian-jornet-summits-...

I suppose one can still solo with a support that's just here in case of emergency, with the added bonus of being able to document the climb.
Post reply on HN