On a related note, a team has just set off to attempt a summit of K2 in winter -- a feat thought physically impossible:
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/12/K2-mountain-wint...
Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest
101–110 of 135 posts
Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest
#102Just 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.
I don't know what the relevant statistics actually are, but if the death rate for sherpas rescuing solo climbers is higher than that for sherpas supporting guided climbs -- even if the total number of deaths is lower -- this still suggests reducing the number of solo rescues, no? Especially since, as far as I can tell, supporting guided climbs is way more economically important.
Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
There also isn’t really an alternative - and if I’m paying taxes for the services of course I’m going to use them while I am forced to pay for them.
I have no problem paying, personally, but I don’t really like the line of reasoning used in your comment.
Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just tell the climbers in advance they will not mount rescue missions for people who do not meet a minimum threshold of competence and preparation.
How about not mounting publicly funded rescue missions at all? You can pay for insurance if you want someone to risk their life to come get you.
Although Everest is a bit of an outlier here - this is a dangerous sentiment to hold if someone actually holds it.
Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I don't know what the relevant statistics actually are, but if the death rate for sherpas rescuing solo climbers is higher than that for sherpas supporting guided climbs -- even if the total number of deaths is lower -- this still suggests reducing the number of solo rescues, no? Especially since, as far as I can tell, supporting guided climbs is way more economically important.
human lives aren't usually fungible so your accounting method strikes me as a bit strange.
Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I’m aware that rescue and corpse removal is highly dangerous, but that just means the insurance would be extremely expensive.
Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I’m sure it really is that simple.
It's not a question of it being simple it's a question of ROI the market would be too small. If you read the article this was done using stock Eurocopter AS350 Squirrel.
I’m sure they haven’t thought of this yet. Please tell me more.
Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest
#108Why 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?
“Can’t avoid death, so might as well die a ridiculously stupid, horrific one at 35 instead of a calm, peaceful one at 80 surrounded by loved ones.”
Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Mountaineering above 6000m is never extraordinarily safe. During past 5 years death rate on Everest is 3.4%. That's pretty high if you ask me. If you were sitting in a bus full of climbers, one of them wasn't going back home. Sure, there is always a lot of stupidity but pretty much its just nature. No one is still able to predict weather perfectly, no one can tell who is going to get AMS and people even sitting on ba…
While I don't want to die from a change in the weather while climbing, to take on Mother Nature and lose seems a bit more acceptable than to die because I was stuck in a human traffic jam caused by a dentist from Akron going through a midlife crisis who is using Everest as a coping mechanism. Once upon a time I had climbing the seven summits as a goal but with the way things are on Everest now, I'd never attempt it regardless the quality of my own skills. There are just too many inexperienced climbers and too many ways they can cause harm beyond themselves.
Re: Nepal bans solo climbers from Mount Everest
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
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...
You could live to be 100, but you're going to die, and be dead for the rest of eternity. What's the difference between 30 and 100 measured against eternity? Both numbers are infinitesimally small. Be afraid of that, cower before it. Go on the internet to call anyone who isn't an idiot. Hide behind an illusory concept of productivity.