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

91–100 of 135 posts

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#91

Post by lloeki »

deepGem wrote: post #83
jdietrich wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Racing drivers don't get kudos for racing without a helmet or a seat belt - nobody would let them race and they'd be seen as moronic for even suggesting the idea. Nepal have every right to ban people from doing pointless, stupid things on their mountain. Jornet's good friend Ueli Steck died earlier this year. He was solo climbing Nuptse without fixed protection, supplemental oxygen or even ice axes. If Jornet has not…

The racing analogy might have some flaws. Seat belts and helmets are for protection, they don't aid you in driving. Ice axes and supplemental oxygen aid you in climbing. You could very well climb without them. They are not safety devices. Seat belt is by definition a safety device which will save your life in case of a high speed accident. I think the only seat belt equivalent is the climbing rope.

What do you think the rope is tied to? A team member. The team itself is your seat belt in such ascensions.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#92

Post by aglionby »

mikeash wrote: post #74
amorphid wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course, one could argue that govt shouldn't have any power over what an individual can do If I were in charge (I never will be), my first inclination would be to not restrict high risk climbing. But then I wouldn't be able to shake the feeling that a hands off approach would be that simple. I'd want to understand the drawbacks of people dying on the mountain. I'd be concerned with being responsible for rescue co…

I’d say, let them climb how they want, but mandate full insurance coverage for any needed evacuation, medical treatment, and corpse removal. As long as people don’t litter or pass costs along to others, the rest could be up to them.

I'm not sure that's the point though -- once you're up there these things are dangerous rather than just expensive. bhickey has a post further down which explains their experience nicely.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#93

Post by alexfoo »

paulcole wrote: post #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-...

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?

KJ responded to one article with summit photos plus other evidence (which he doesn't want published yet).

https://iancorless.org/2017/12/10/kilian-jornet-everest-spee...

(I didn't downvote you, but it's worth doing a bit more research before making a statement like that.)

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#94

Post by dillondoyle »

grahamannett wrote: post #84
hprotagonist wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i’m with you. No serious alpinists do much of anything on everest these days, and it’s hard to do a rational cost/benefit for the fees of well-heeled tourists versus the rights of the sherpas and the state of the mountain.

im always curious where the notion that 'everest is the worlds highest stair stepper' comes from. everyone i know whos a serious alpinist still holds it in pretty high regards for any number of reasons. which serious alpinists no longer do much on everest? of course its not a climb for mountaineers trying to put up a new route/make news due to the fact its the most climbed 8ker but i can think of 3 big names still gu…

Why would Honnold commit to spending two months AWAY from rock? He struggles with just a single 'rest' day which for him usually means running up a mountain (not snowy technical). I assume you mean Alex Honnold the rock climber...

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#95

Post by jdietrich »

deepGem wrote: post #83
jdietrich wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Racing drivers don't get kudos for racing without a helmet or a seat belt - nobody would let them race and they'd be seen as moronic for even suggesting the idea. Nepal have every right to ban people from doing pointless, stupid things on their mountain. Jornet's good friend Ueli Steck died earlier this year. He was solo climbing Nuptse without fixed protection, supplemental oxygen or even ice axes. If Jornet has not…

The racing analogy might have some flaws. Seat belts and helmets are for protection, they don't aid you in driving. Ice axes and supplemental oxygen aid you in climbing. You could very well climb without them. They are not safety devices. Seat belt is by definition a safety device which will save your life in case of a high speed accident. I think the only seat belt equivalent is the climbing rope.

Traditional rock climbers use their ropes and equipment as both a fall-arrest system and a means of ascent. Sport climbers only use their ropes as a fall-arrest system and sometimes and a means of resting on the rock. The same can be done with ice axes - they're a vital means of arresting a fall, regardless of whether you use them to ascend.

If you're determined to climb into the death zone without supplemental oxygen, you could still carry a small cylinder as a bailout option. Hell, if you want to make the climb really challenging, you could carry ten oxygen cylinders and a Piñata.

More to the point, you could just not climb Everest. Other than the altitude, there's nothing particularly interesting about the climb. The Nürburgring was the most interesting and challenging course in the Formula 1 world championship, but the sport abandoned it in 1976 because it couldn't be made safe. The drivers agreed that no race track was worth creating widows and orphans for.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#96

Post by elcapitan »

golergka wrote: post #90
fergie wrote: post #57

If you haven't read them already, I really recommend the following two books: "Into Thin Air" by John Krakauer was the first book to critically explore the "Death Zone" and the state of mountaineering on Everest generally- It was written in 1997, but is just as relevant now. "Dark Shadows Falling" by Joe Simpson is another commentary on the state of mountaineering on Everest in 1997. Simpson was famously left for dea…

> he brings a keen insight into the morals of high-altitude climbing from the point of view of the "one that was left behind" I got curious and read a wikipedia article about the book; from the summary, I don't see any special "morals" about the incident: one mountaineer had a reason to believe another one dead and saved himself, without knowingly leaving anyone behind. Is wikipedia summary incorrect?

I think the questionable (in terms of traditional mountaineering ethics, I guess) was that Simon Yates had to cut off his partners rope. It's probably the pragmatic thing to do there, but that was definitely the part that was discussed afterwards. He had to assume that he was dead after that, that part was never questioned.

On the other hand, he stayed at their basecamp for a prolonged time (if I remember it correctly), which in the end helped Joe, who crawled back there through the glacier with his broken bones and almost dead from dehydration. So he still somehow believed in the miracle that happened.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#97

Post by dilyevsky »

ordinaryperson wrote: post #54

Just hiking to Everest Base Camp and nearby Kala Pattar (8.5 days, ~18,500 ft) was brutal for me -- and that was with porters carrying my heavier gear. Hopefully this will save the lives of a few Sherpas (who, btw, are an ethnic group; it's not a job title). They're inevitably tasked with attempting to save rich Western idiots doing stupid stuff like climb Everest without support. I'd just add my personal experience…

So your ego was bruised by some trek and your solution is to ruin it for everyone else? "rich Western idiot" logic. Also just fyi - most sherpas die supporting guided climbs not rescuing solo climbers.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#98

Post by manquer »

rascalbrother wrote: post #27
qaq wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didier_Delsalle I bet you could design helicopter that would be able to repeat this with much less effort

That chopper was stripped to the bone so that one dude could fly in it, with a fuel time of 1 hour. It also landed on the summit which is more flat. Don't think it would be easily and safely able to carry an addition (dead) body that's probably perched on an incline, let alone carry rescuers. It takes upwards of 6 hours to chip the dead body off the ice (if it's been frozen there for a while)

You don't need to use a manned one at all . You could design unmanned drone which can carry the weight of the (dead)person. Losses while perhaps costly will improve the design and more acceptable than risking human lives.

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#99

Post by oblio »

Fricken wrote: post #79
basicplus2 wrote: post #4

Why ban solo climbing? If an idiot wants to do something stupid, why interfere with natural selection? And why waste money looking for them?

Why do you call them idiots? Is it because you're a coward, or someone stupid enough to believe death is something that can be avoided?

I don't know about you, but I've managed to avoid death by Everest for over 3 decades.

And regarding the "coward" part, surely there must be some ways more productive to society by which they can demonstrate their bravery...

Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest

#100

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN