[HN Gopher] Three American climbers solve the 'last great proble...
___________________________________________________________________
Three American climbers solve the 'last great problem in the
Himalayas'
Author : carabiner
Score : 185 points
Date : 2023-12-01 19:49 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
| 303uru wrote:
| Good read here: https://trekebc.com/alan-rousseaus-north-face-
| climb-of-the-j...
|
| This is a wild accomplishment in the mountaineering world.
| lbeckman314 wrote:
| Thanks for sharing carabiner, phenomenal achievement! Here's a
| non-paywall/gifted link:
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/01/us/climbing-jannu-north-f...
| ghaff wrote:
| I thought it was a crazy looking peak when I was in the area.
| There are apparently (vaguely! relatively!) easier routes but it
| looks insane.
| WoodEye wrote:
| Always wondered how granola types like this fund these
| expeditions. Are they privately funded by wealthy individuals or
| funded personally by working jobs in the off-season? Or family
| money?
| ghaff wrote:
| Outdoor equipment manufacturers in a lot of cases.
| jonah wrote:
| Mostly working jobs in the off-season and sponsorships like
| 'ghaff mentions.
|
| It's not _that_ expensive of a hobby. Maybe $5k of gear a piece
| plus travel expenses for a minimal expedition like this.
| bluGill wrote:
| IT is expensive, but not in $$$ terms. You have to dedicate
| your life to physical training which takes a lot of time. You
| have to have jobs that let you take a lot of time off.
| Nothing that is difficult per se, but still not normal.
|
| It is also expensive in life terms - local guides often do
| dangerous work making this possible.
| anon84873628 wrote:
| Combination of everything, including requests for donations. I
| gave a bit to help a friend climb Everest. He also got free
| gear and food from suppliers.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| FTA:
|
| > Rousseau ... guides climbers in Utah and beyond.
|
| > Cornell ... summers around the rock-climbing hub of Yosemite
| National Park, working at a restaurant (owned by Anker, a
| mentor) to help fund his pursuits. He lives in a 2003
| Freightliner van, with 320,000 miles, [down by the river].
|
| > Marvell ... has a few sponsorship deals and also his own
| welding business ... climbing up and rappelling down oil
| platforms, timing repair work with the tides.
|
| Per gram, ultralight climbing gear is pretty expensive. But you
| can only carry so many grams with you. And yes, plane tickets
| to Tibet are $1600. Food isn't that expensive. And yes, they
| had some porters and pack animals to help them walk rations to
| base camp at 15,000 feet. A lot of people probably spend more
| on golfing than these guys spent on this epic.
|
| There's a huge difference between the cost of an 'expedition'
| like this and the cost of adventure tourism. If you're not
| paying for dozens of people to carry oxygen bottles and dry
| clothes and tents and warm meals it doesn't cost anything to go
| outside. And if you structure your life around spending more
| time climbing/surfing/hiking, it doesn't seem like such an
| impossibility to not clock in for a few months.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| "If you're not paying for dozens of people to carry oxygen
| bottles and dry clothes and tents and warm meals it doesn't
| cost anything to go outside."
|
| In some cases unfortunately it does. The local governments of
| the Himalayas sell quite expensive permits to climb the high
| summits. This one was probably free, but give it some time
| and popularity and you will need a expensive permit for doing
| this as well.
| dieselgate wrote:
| Any, none, or all of the above plus sponsorships, ads,
| competition winnings etc. If an athlete is sponsored they might
| get a lot of gear and travel paid for along with maybe a cash
| stipend.
|
| There is a whole spectrum of what it means to be a
| "professional"
| lispisok wrote:
| Upper middle class and wealthier parents. Even if they are
| living a budget "dirtbag" lifestyle they always have parents
| for a cash infusion if they need it. People who can afford not
| to work.
| mym1990 wrote:
| Source or are you just spewing out your rear end?
| mikestew wrote:
| I'm not going to say that it is the common method, but I've
| seen what parent describes for multiple people. I'll be the
| first to admit that I probably live in an upper middle
| class bubble these days, but it certainly happens.
|
| OTOH, I've known people that live in a trailer and had a
| Harley-Davidson motorcycle that was worth more than the
| trailer. So one doesn't have to reach terribly far to find
| someone that is living their priorities. Just because _you_
| aren't willing to work odd jobs and live in a van to
| finance your badminton career doesn't mean others aren't.
| mym1990 wrote:
| I am not saying it is crazy to think that some people get
| by with the help of their parents, but to blatantly just
| generalize "these granola types" who just accomplished
| one of the absolute craziest climbs in history...comes
| off a little uneducated.
| LesZedCB wrote:
| well the American alpine club has an average income that's
| in the six figures iirc. however when there's an annual fee
| of $100 or so, it's a bit of selection bias.
|
| however one of their perks is the "Live your dream" grant
| where they fund amateur climbers to go on their dream trip
| once a year. it's application based but I've known people
| who've gone to the Karakorum on it.
| mym1990 wrote:
| "well the American alpine club has an average income
| that's in the six figures iirc" how do you even come by
| information like this? The lowest membership fee is 45$
| and as you mentioned it filters out a significant portion
| of the climbing population. If you are using a charity
| that likely has multi millionaires as part of its
| membership as part of your generalization for incomes
| across the whole climbing population...I would consider
| the _possibility_ that you are way off.
| lispisok wrote:
| Been around a lot of climbers and skiers, many of whom at
| the elite level. The kind of lifestyle necessary to get to
| that level requires you to practice your sport instead of
| earning money, so you need outside support to live aka
| wealthy family. I dont think I've met a single person at
| high level in these activities who didnt come from a
| wealthy family. I am not trying to take away from their
| skill and accomplishment but that's the financial reality.
| It wasnt always this way but as the skill ceiling went up
| and cost of living went up it became more necessary.
| OfSanguineFire wrote:
| Within the Central and Eastern European mountaineering
| scene that occasionally does expeditions to the Eight
| Thousanders, there are plenty of climbers who do not come
| from wealthy families. After all, such intergenerational
| transmission of wealth got interrupted during the
| socialist era, but the state provided infrastructure for
| people to enter the sport regardless of their background.
| Instead, the money comes from sponsorships.
|
| I know this firsthand, as a friend of mine is such a
| climber, and my language-services business has provided
| native-English revision of his and his peers' sponsorship
| applications for some years now. In between expeditions,
| it is a constant hustle for money.
| mym1990 wrote:
| Not related to this endeavor but I generally watch people pool
| enough money from jobs here and there to 'take a shot' at
| something like this(and obviously everyone's risk tolerance and
| personal achievement will vary). I do think it is difficult to
| have a steady career given the amount of dedication that is
| needed for fitness, planning, etc... for big trips.
| tomjakubowski wrote:
| I think a lot of window washers do it to fund climbing trips
| jasonpeacock wrote:
| Ed Viesturs' biography, "No Shortcuts to the Top", covers this
| well - you can see how he saves money, works various jobs, and
| pursues sponsorships to fund his Everest, K2, and other big-
| mountain expeditions.
|
| He'd get a trip all organized, then it will be aborted mid-
| climb due to weather or other issues, and he'd have to start
| all over again and take a few years until he can try again.
|
| It's also just a good read if you're interested in the topic.
| czinck wrote:
| On top of what everyone else said about how they make money,
| lots of climbers at this level live outrageously frugally and
| so can easily save up. Marc-Andre Leclerc lived in a
| stairwell[0], and their dinners are rice and beans or "what was
| on sale at walmart". Think stereotypical startup incubator of
| bunk beds and ramen, there's only one goal and it's not day-to-
| day comfort.
|
| [0] http://marcleclerc.blogspot.com/2012/07/dreaded-first-
| blog-p...
| hilux wrote:
| That is awesome.
|
| I am inspired by people who sacrifice to achieve big goals -
| although if the goal is important enough, perhaps you don't
| feel the "sacrifice."
| heavyset_go wrote:
| The climbers I know who have the time and money to do things
| like this fall into the latter category.
| glaucon wrote:
| "Mount Jannu" and "The Jannu" ... neither heard of these phrases
| used to describe Jannu before -
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumbhakarna_Mountain.
| liversage wrote:
| It always irks me when 'Mount' is added as a prefix to a proper
| mountain name like 'Mount Annapurna', 'Mount Ama Dablam'.
| Should it then be 'Mount Mt. Everest'?
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| This occurs with all geographical features whenever a name
| crosses into another language whose speakers can't interpret
| the part of the name that means "river" / "mountain" / "fort"
| / "bridge" / "hills" / "vale" / etc.
| xarope wrote:
| In mountaineering, we just say Annapurna, and Ama Dablam.
| Another example, Khan Tengri, not Mt Khan Tengri (lol)
| LesZedCB wrote:
| holy fucking shit that hero photo of the climber on the verglas
| is totally nuts! i've done a fair bit of ice climbing myself, but
| easy, fat waterfall stuff. leading a pitch like that at altitude
| with that kind of exposure makes my stomach absolutely drop.
| alpinists are totally crazy! <3
| mjhay wrote:
| Yeah, I have no idea how really high-altitude climbers do it.
| I've climbed pitches of otherwise fairly easy alpine ice at
| about 6000m in Peru, and that was the hardest climbing I've
| ever done. I've never had my calves burn like that. I can't
| imagine leading on verglas like that at >7000m.
| xarope wrote:
| I have staggered up a 30% slope at 6000m, and remember taking
| a few steps and then having to have a breather (albeit with
| equipment and food weighing me down). Although I do ice climb
| at lower altitudes, I couldn't imagine effort to do the same
| at 6000m.
|
| What was it like? Make 2-3 moves, then stand for 30 seconds
| to catch your breath?!?
| petsfed wrote:
| Every time I whack a dinner-place sized piece of ice off, or
| absolutely bury my picks in the ice because any thing less
| feels dangerously insecure, I think about stuff like what's in
| that photo. I have no idea how I could ever climb something
| like the Smear of Fear, which looks like a fat easy waterfall
| compared to that photo.
| blackguardx wrote:
| Smear of Fear on Long Peak's Diamond? Do you live in
| Colorado?
| petsfed wrote:
| Not any more, but when I was learning to climb, ca 2000, I
| was living in the Boulder area, and the Smear loomed pretty
| large in the legendarium I came up in.
| blackguardx wrote:
| I live in the Boulder area. I've gotten back into ice
| climbing recently after a ~10 year hiatus. Smear of Fear
| is definitely legendary. I don't think it has had many
| repeats. I'm not sure how much it freezes up anymore,
| though.
| dilyevsky wrote:
| There's an old but still gold video from Millet with some
| pretty cool stomach-churning footage
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISagf2eCzKg
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| These people prepared to die for their sport. It is another
| level of adventure. Source: I have climbed about 10 metres of
| not ice in an air conditioned gym :-)
| elzbardico wrote:
| I think the NYT should be a beacon of progress and start using
| the metric system. Reading things like 15500 feet in 2023 hurts.
| avdlinde wrote:
| Things like "6,000 vertical feet of climbing, 60 meters of rope
| at a time" do stand out.
| drstewart wrote:
| Oh the dramatics
| carabiner wrote:
| Maybe the best point for a popular audience:
|
| > For alpinists, the public's fascination with the highest
| mountains is a bit like judging an ocean swimmer by how deep the
| water is. Marvell has had similar queries from well-meaning
| acquaintances: How high is Jannu? "That's not really the point,"
| he said.
|
| So you got stuff like Mt. Whitney in California, where you can
| walk to the top, and it's the highest point in the lower 48. Then
| you've got the same mountain but this route:
| https://gripped.com/news/new-13-pitch-5-13-on-mount-whitney/
| which is dramatically more difficult. For climbers it's all about
| the route and max elevation is less important.
| Karellen wrote:
| I wonder if the question a lot of the public are _trying_ to
| ask is "How much vertical ascent is there in the climb?", but
| they're not familiar enough with climbing or its terminology to
| come up with the right wording in the moment, and it just comes
| out as "How high is it?"
|
| It's not like a lot of people would get much out of asking "How
| challenging is the climb?", because they'd have no real frame
| of reference for interpreting the answer. "How much up?" feels
| like a question that should be relevant, and to which the
| answer can be easily grasped.
| FartyMcFarter wrote:
| Max elevation still matters a lot since it affects weather and
| oxygen levels.
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| How does the thin air/lack of oxygen not mess with them over that
| many days?
| buzzdenver wrote:
| They're at really high altitudes only a low percentage of time
| jjulius wrote:
| Acclimatization.
| GloriousKoji wrote:
| The "death zone" starts at 26,000 feet. The peak of the
| mountain is about 1,000 feet under the death zone so
| supplemental oxygen isn't a requirement.
|
| That being said the effect of lower oxygen is you go slower. It
| took them a week to ascend 10k feet, and if you'll allow me to
| assume a spherical cow then a hypothetically similar climb at
| sea level could probably be done in a couple of days going by
| how fast top climbers climb El Capitan.
| carabiner wrote:
| Eh maybe it does:
| https://archive.nytimes.com/well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/2...
| snowwrestler wrote:
| It does, that's one reason frostbite is such a risk in these
| high climbs. It's harder for the body to generate heat because
| it's got less oxygen to work with.
| te wrote:
| As a civilian, I'm surprised to learn, with all the technical
| improvements in mountaineering gear, that frostbite on gloved
| hands is still an unsolved problem.
| LesZedCB wrote:
| finger dexterity is important for technical climbing so thick
| gloves are a trade off. additionally, when hanging on to
| technical ice tools, your finger tip is doing a lot of work, so
| not a lot of circulation to keep the tissue healthy.
| zakary wrote:
| My understanding is it has definitely been solved by the use of
| much thicker gloves or gloves with heating elements. But doing
| difficult technical climbing at very high altitudes also
| requires good dexterity and you are often up there for many
| days. Also lithium batteries don't work much at all in
| temperatures that cold.
|
| I could imagine some kind of warm water tube system that takes
| heat from a heat exchanger on your chest and transports it to
| your hands and feet, and is pumped by the action of walking.
| Not sure if that's been tried before.
|
| There's a lot of great engineers who've done a lot of climbing
| so my guess is pretty anything that works sufficiently well to
| keep hands and feet warm, is also too complex, expensive or
| bulky to be useful in really extreme mountaineering
| environments.
| Crunchified wrote:
| Lithiums don't work in cold temperatures? That's a new one on
| me. Many lithium battery formulations work in colder
| conditions than other common formulations. I don't read the
| NYT so didn't read the article, but were they climbing in
| temperatures well below -40deg with exposed batteries? I know
| that lithiums are commonly used in balloon payloads that can
| get mighty cold!
| lstodd wrote:
| Eww, people of warm climates...
|
| You try making a few calls in -15C 5 m/s wind (typical 55
| latitude continental climate weather in winter), then see
| the charge bar plummeting to zero when you attempt to call
| up a taxi so that you don't freeze to death.
|
| About only thing you can do at that point is shove the
| phone into your panties to heat it back up and then hope
| what's left of the charge is enough and it doesn't refreeze
| while you're at it.
|
| No, lithiums don't work much below 0C. Balloon payloads use
| insulation and heaters, but that obviously eats into energy
| available.
| gambiting wrote:
| I mean, other than this lovely anecdote, lithium
| batteries do, in fact, work absolutely fine I'm very cold
| temperatures, albeit at reduced capacity. The reason your
| phone shuts down is because the allowed discharge rate of
| the battery also goes down and it can't run its
| components at requested power levels, not because the
| battery stopped working.
|
| Since we're sharing anecdotes - EVs are extremely popular
| in Norway and YouTube is full of videos of people testing
| the cars in negative 40 or even 50 centigrade. They work
| fine even without battery preheat.
| bdamm wrote:
| They do work fine, but let's be real, they work with
| reduced range and increased charge times. I have an
| "older" Tesla with nearly 100k mi and operate in the
| north quite a bit. There is a tradeoff, which I
| personally think is worth it, but many do not or cannot
| make it.
|
| It's fine to acknowledge the reality of current
| technology while also being optimistic about the future.
| Operating EVs in cold remote areas requires diligence and
| preparation. It's a fact.
| lstodd wrote:
| Man, I've been designing solar+battery offgrid installs
| for a few years up to my ears into battery datasheets.
| And I tell you, thermal is critical for the performance.
|
| The phone can't get the current it needs exactly because
| the temperature is out of spec. This is the definition of
| "battery stopped working".
|
| Now if you've got a tesla-sized one, and it has a good
| load, then you have another problem - you have to cool
| it, or it shoots above 50C and you get a dead battery
| eventually. I can imagine a 80% charge battery of this
| size heating itself in a few minutes of load even from
| -50C. Won't get the usual 2K cycles to half capacity in
| those conditions, but the car will still move. A bit.
|
| In other news, Norway is overrated wrt colds courtesy of
| Gulfstream. Compared to say northern Kazakhstan it has a
| nice mild climate.
| dpc050505 wrote:
| I'm Canadian. My phone doesn't instantly die in -30c, I
| probably lose a bit of battery life but I can still spend
| the whole day taking snowboarding videos or pop google
| maps open after a day of ice climbing.
| dilyevsky wrote:
| I had a phone go completely off on multiple occasions doing
| winter runs in tahoe and it wasn't even that cold (like
| mid-20s but with wind) so it's not so simple. And yes
| nearly 8000m peak it's common to have -40deg temps
| admax88qqq wrote:
| > Many lithium battery formulations work in colder
|
| It's possible, in fact probable that your phone doesn't
| have one of the aforementioned formulations.
| Crunchified wrote:
| These guys aren't using their cell phones to keep warm,
| I'm quite sure. It's true that Lithium Ion Polymer
| batteries, so very popular in portable rechargeable
| devices (and prone to the occasional thermal runaway)
| usually don't do well below 0degC. But that's not likely
| to be what they'd choose for such a mission. Simple
| Energizer brand AA/AAA disposable lithium batteries work
| fine down to about -40deg, and can generally power heated
| socks and gloves etc. without any modification, and
| aren't particularly expensive given their considerably
| greater energy capacity and much wider temperature
| tolerance over alkaline formulations. The disposable
| lithiums weigh a good bit less than alkalines, too...for,
| you know, when every gram counts?
|
| Edit: Also, these batteries aren't necessarily exposed to
| outside temperatures. Strategically placed near the body,
| they can be kept at higher temperatures for greater power
| efficiency - but if they are exposed to outside temps,
| they will not die as easily as your (pathetically useless
| in this situation) cell phone batteries would.
| davidw wrote:
| > warm water tube system
|
| Not to pick on you because that sounds like a legit idea for
| the environment those guys were in, but that's part of the
| "plot" of "The Complicator's Gloves"
|
| https://thedailywtf.com/articles/the_complicator_0x27_s_glov.
| ..
| devnullbrain wrote:
| It's also the opposite of a stillsuit from Dune
| debo_ wrote:
| A busygown?
| bdamm wrote:
| Yeah, powered by a pump near your chest, with heat pushed out
| from the center using liquid, and then distributed everywhere
| it is needed using smaller and smaller tubes that get close
| to the surface of the skin before returning. And why not use
| this same liquid to provide extra oxygen. Love it!
|
| The last time I was on the periphery of mountaineering,
| performance enhancing drugs were commonplace. A breakthrough
| in performance enhancing drugs should yield new results in
| mountaineering.
| devnullbrain wrote:
| What kind of PEDs?
| burkaman wrote:
| Here's a 2001 article with some examples: https://publica
| tions.americanalpineclub.org/articles/1220011.... I don't
| personally know any serious alpine climbers so I have no
| idea how common this stuff is.
| snowwrestler wrote:
| The critical factor is weight. Electric heated gloves only
| work if they have power. Batteries are heavy.
|
| Water and fuel are also heavy, which means climbers on big
| routes like this are usually riding the edge of starvation
| and dehydration for days, which further raises the risk of
| frostbite in extremities.
| Fricken wrote:
| There is a lot of stop and go. In the kind of conditions
| they were in. It's hard not to break a sweat when climbing,
| and hard to avoid early stage hypothermia when belaying.
| When the core cools down, blood flow to the extremities is
| restricted to conserve heat, putting them at risk of
| frostbite.
| jmye wrote:
| > I could imagine some kind of warm water tube system that
| takes heat from a heat exchanger on your chest and transports
| it to your hands and feet, and is pumped by the action of
| walking. Not sure if that's been tried before.
|
| I feel like you just re-invented the circulatory system. I
| don't mean that to be snarky at all, just that I think part
| of the problem with your hands is that your body starts
| sending them less blood to keep your core warm. I'd think
| that pumping more heat away from your core would be bad for
| survival.
|
| But my climbing is also not on vertical rock at 25k+ feet!
| eternityforest wrote:
| They must have some way to keep gear warm or they wouldn't be
| able to drink water, right? Can't you just put the batteries
| in a vacuum insulated can?
|
| Vacuum flasks are such an amazing invention. They really seem
| to work exactly like you would want.
| crubier wrote:
| Space suits solved it. But climbers need dexterity.
|
| Thermal insulation requires thickness, almost by definition.
| Dexterity requires thinness, also almost by definition. It's
| hard
| bobbylarrybobby wrote:
| Did space suits solve it? Astronauts are in a vacuum, so heat
| transfer can't take place except through radiation. Meanwhile
| the cold air at the top of the Himalayas is very good at
| pulling the heat out of you.
| qchris wrote:
| The "space is cold" thing is actually a pretty good
| shibboleth for people who don't know that much about
| engineering things in space. Most space systems have to put
| in effort to reject excess heat than to hold onto basic
| amounts, hence those giant radiators and the high
| emissivity paint that gets used on most things.
| crubier wrote:
| Note that thermal insulation also means insulating from
| hot surfaces :-)
| crubier wrote:
| Vacuum is bad at heat transfer, sure.
|
| But mechanical parts of the space station can be as hot as
| 120C (250F) and as cold as -150C (-250F), so I'm pretty
| sure you do want thermal insulation :-)
| krisoft wrote:
| > Space suits solved it.
|
| Worth noting that 65% of all the injuries reported during
| spacewalks occur to the hand.[1] They "solved" it as in
| astronauts are not dying because of glove malfunctions. But
| there is plenty of improvement to be wished for with the
| solution.
|
| 1: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20140014058
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| Apparently the hands, feet and upper part of the face have the
| most thermal conductivity. So if you are hot cool these with a
| wet towel.
| lukasb wrote:
| North face of Jannu wearing North Face, no less
| liversage wrote:
| The brand name 'The North Face' is inspired by mountaineering
| where the north face of a mountain often is the most
| interesting but also difficult side as it's always in the shade
| (in the northern hemisphere). E.g., the Alps have the famous
| classical north faces of Eiger, Matterhorn and Grandes Jorasses
| which are climbed by only the most accomplished mountaineers.
| granzymes wrote:
| Their logo is also based on Half Dome, an iconic rock
| formation in Yosemite.
| subsubzero wrote:
| A little bit on why this peak is so hard. First off highly
| recommend watching Meru(mentioned on the NYtimes article) as the
| conditions look very similar on both mountains(Meru - being 21k
| feet), with Jammu being 4k feet higher in elevation.
|
| Judging from the pictures of the climb you have very steep walls
| which are not entirely ice/snow or all rock, but a mixture of
| both which means you need strong skills in both rock climbing
| routes 5.9+(grading for rock climbing, this being very difficult)
| and dealing with snowy alpine conditions and using ice climbing
| axes as well as crampons. My guess is they switched footwear from
| boots with crampons to rock climbing shoes based on the
| conditions of the wall.
|
| So you have all the skills above and now you have to deal with
| extreme cold and weather conditions that are positively artic(-30
| to -40f at nights). In addition you are at a zone where if
| someone makes a mistake and gets seriously hurt that person most
| likely is dead and it could lead to the others in the party also
| dying, its why picking your partner is really really important.
|
| Lastly the biggest elephant in the room - elevation. Despite how
| fit you are and well trained this can be a complete blocker, some
| people just get altitude sickness above a certain height and have
| to turn around to lower elevations.
|
| So you are doing a route like climbing el capitan but at 20,000+
| feet, and unlike el capitan you have ice and snow as well as
| weather which is never seen in yosemite, so hope this illustrates
| how difficult this summit was. Hats off to all three climbers and
| hope that frostbitten finger makes a recovery.
| wetmore wrote:
| > My guess is they switched footwear from boots with crampons
| to rock climbing shoes based on the conditions of the wall.
|
| Just a nit, the grade is M7 AI5+ A0 and doesn't include a free
| climbing grade. I would assume they stayed in their boots the
| whole time and did a lot of mixed climbing.
| hackernewds wrote:
| would you mind elaborating or linking to this grading
| notation? not sure what to even look for
| whymauri wrote:
| This is a mixed route, so the comment above cites three
| grading scales:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_(climbing)
|
| The Mixed Climbing, Alpine Ice, and Aid Climbing grade
| scales, respectively. I wish I could provide more detail
| into each than the Wikipedia article, but the reality is
| each grading scale could probably warrant a small book of
| history and local/regional ethics.
| dgacmu wrote:
| To build on this a little - M7 involves climbing a mix of
| ice and rock, but instead of using conventional fingers
| and rubber-soled climbing shoes, you'd do the rock-only
| parts by "dry-tooling" - using your ice axe and crampons
| on the bare rock. It's kind of a weird experience.
| jwagenet wrote:
| M7 is a mixed ice and rock grade and AI5+ is an alpine
| (permanent) ice grade. A0 is easy aid climbing, most likely
| hanging on hammered pitons or nuts.
|
| The mixed and ice grade implies the rock climbing is around
| 5.11 (harder than most recreational climbers will climb in
| traditional style), likely with ice tools, and the ice
| climbing is technical yet with decent protection.
|
| https://alaskaiceclimbing.com/climb-ratings/
| whymauri wrote:
| It's worth mentioning the altitude. I climb several
| grades less at ~3000 meters (Colombia) than near sea
| level (Chattanooga, New England, etc). I cannot imagine
| what climbing at 6k meters+ feels like. And these guys
| are hauling gear with no margin for error.
| ben7799 wrote:
| Thanks for the reply.. the main picture in the article
| looks significantly harder than 5.9+ to my amateur
| climber eyes, I'm not sure if there person above realizes
| 5.9+ is a specific rating in some places and 5.9+ doesn't
| mean 5.10, 5.11, 5.12, etc..
|
| Ice climbing is straight nuts no matter what, even if you
| don't do it at high altitudes with no O2.
|
| Climbing sheer faces with no Oxygen at that height is
| just literally bonkers.. hard to believe anyone who
| doesn't climb can even fathom that.
|
| This climb is so outrageously impressive compared to the
| silly "race to climb all the 8000M mountains but the
| Sherpas haul everything up and set up ropes for you and
| maybe pull you up the mountain" stuff that has been in
| the news lately.
| hamiltonkibbe wrote:
| Bit of a tangent: Around here, and likely in many other
| places that were developed before double-digit YDS grades
| were a thing, 5.9+ is a specific and notorious grade,
| that is usually closer to 5.11 than 5.9.
| orbisvicis wrote:
| Does that explain why many outdoors top-rope and lead
| climbing routes in the US feel about two grades harder
| than equivalently graded indoor routes? Specifically
| east-coast but I've heard the same applies nationally.
| tomtheelder wrote:
| I think that's just gyms grading soft to be honest.
| sulam wrote:
| Gyms are just a different thing. There a few places where
| gym grades translate well onto real rock, but they are
| few and far between, and nowhere with mostly trad routes
| will translate. Smith Rock for instance probably
| translates fine. Yosemite does not.
| dsauerbrun wrote:
| the hell kind of gym are you at that Smith Rock grades
| feel comparable? that place is sandbagged as hell.
| hamiltonkibbe wrote:
| A moonboard!
| dsauerbrun wrote:
| gyms are typically softer to give their clientele a
| feeling of progress. this makes people feel better and
| want to come back. if you're stuck at v3 for several
| months you'd be more likely to give up telling yourself
| you're not cut out for climbing... at least that's my(and
| many others') theory behind soft gyms
| KittenInABox wrote:
| > you need strong skills in both rock climbing routes
| 5.9+(grading for rock climbing, this being very difficult)
|
| Additional context: you will be surprised at the easiness 5.9
| is in the gym. Don't make this mistake outside; a 5.9 will kick
| your ass.
| __MatrixMan__ wrote:
| If the rating was determined in 2017, you can expect the
| difficulty to resemble what you find in the gym. It's the
| 5.9's whose ratings were applied in 1975--back when there was
| no such thing as a 5.13--they will kick your ass because that
| 9 is a 9/10, not a 9/15c. We've been making the denominator
| bigger as we continue to invent harder grades, and it creates
| a skew problem.
| sulam wrote:
| While this is mostly true, I just want to point out that
| it's mostly the less traveled routes that have this
| problem. Someone with a modicum of crack technique and an
| unremarkable gym ability will be able to get up Nutcracker
| (famous old school Yosemite 5.9 climb) without it feeling
| like they're doing anything above gym 5.10.
| __MatrixMan__ wrote:
| Good to know, thanks.
|
| A member of my crew likes to seek out off-the-beaten-path
| climbs. The rest of us are just happy that somebody has a
| plan. Maybe this has set me up with a bit of a bias.
| leetcrew wrote:
| > 5.9+(grading for rock climbing, this being very difficult)
|
| can you provide more context on this? this just seems a bit odd
| to me as a casual indoor climber. a 5.9 route isn't the
| easiest, but most of the holds are jugs and you can do the
| whole thing statically. a generally athletic person could
| probably climb a 5.9 in their first few visits to the gym.
|
| I can definitely imagine that climbing a very long 5.9 route in
| full weather gear would be exhausting, but I wouldn't expect a
| world class mountaineer to find it technically challenging.
| killerbeluga wrote:
| 5.9 in the gym and 5.9 outdoors are wildly different levels
| of difficulty. Depending on location an outdoor 5.9 could be
| the equivalent of anything from a 5.11a to a 5.12 and in
| addition you're on lead which adds another significant level
| of difficulty.
| runsWphotons wrote:
| I climb the same in the gym on lead as outside. I think
| this is being exaggerated in this thread or its something
| specific to bay area or something.
| matsur wrote:
| Sport vs trad grades outdoors are very different animals.
| zrezzed wrote:
| Sure. Most of my experience is in California, but I've found
| the grading differences from region to region to be just
| large as from out of state or international.
|
| I climb 5.11c+ comfortably in the gym. I can barely lead a
| short Yosemite 5.8 outdoors; it's terrifyingly more
| difficult. That's a bit on the high side of a delta, but
| still typical.
|
| I would say the difference is 75%+ in the scales simply not
| being the same. For the same grade, the holds would be far
| smaller, positions much more technical, often far more
| sustained, etc. The other ~25% is the environment is much
| more challenging, even with perfect weather at sea level:
| route finding is harder, you have to manage gear, leading is
| scary, etc.
|
| I've done a few high Sierra climbs. Grades there are little
| softer, and my limit is probably ~5.7
| bryananderson wrote:
| For what it's worth, there is also a wide variance in
| grading between different indoor gyms and different outdoor
| climbing areas.
|
| Yosemite grades are notoriously hard; the most popular gym
| chain in California (which I love!) grades are notoriously
| soft. YMMV at other gyms and at other outdoor crags.
|
| At the end of the day it's a subjective guide, I wouldn't
| get too hung up on the numbers.
| VHRanger wrote:
| There's also the factor for people who climb inside a lot
| that they have very inefficient movements outside.
|
| Because the grips aren't as obvious, a lot of effort is
| wasted looking for placements that would be immediate
| indoors.
| scoot wrote:
| "Grips"? I guess you mean "holds" (indoors).
| "Placements"? That's where you place gear, not your
| fingers, and you don't place gear in climbing gyms. I
| appreciate your enthusiasm, but pretending to have
| knowledge of something you know nothing about is a real
| problem on HN (and the internet in general). Best to say
| nothing than make a fool of yourself - something I'm
| still learning.
| Cpoll wrote:
| Alternatively, they speak a different language with
| different terminology and are translating. I know a few
| climbing terms in French and they're quite different.
|
| What would be helpful is commenting on whether their
| assertion is correct or not w.r.t efficiency.
| snowwrestler wrote:
| It's definitely true. The high visibility of holds in the
| gym makes it easy to move quickly, even your first time
| up it, which saves a lot of energy.
|
| Outside, the good and bad holds are probably the same
| color, and may be oriented in weird ways that require
| some feeling around to find the best way to grip them or
| stand on them.
|
| Over time, climbers outside can learn to read the rock
| and make very good guesses about how to reach or step for
| the next usable hold. But it takes time to learn, and is
| somewhat location-specific because of the widely varying
| geology of climbable rock.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| > Best to say nothing than make a fool of yourself -
| something I'm still learning.
|
| I love seeing people plumb the depths of irony this way.
| sulam wrote:
| This difference is mostly about the rock and the technique.
| Granite is very different from limestone and Yosemite
| cracks are very very different from a gym. (And Tuolumne
| domes are yet another thing.) If you spent a summer
| climbing in Yosemite you'd get comfortable with the style
| and the grades and they'd make more sense to you.
|
| Conversely if you took a trip to Smith Rock or Owens River
| Gorge you'd get a much closer correspondence between gym
| ratings and rock ratings.
| bhickey wrote:
| 5.9+ doesn't mean "harder than 5.9," it's a specific grade of
| indeterminate difficulty. YDS used to top out at 5.9 before
| 10a and the gang were added. Any climb that's graded 5.9+
| pre-dates the extension of YDS beyond 5.9.
| kdmccormick wrote:
| Unfortunately, some gyms are now using 5.9+ to mean a grade
| between 5.9 and 5.10a, which is very different than the
| traditional meaning of 5.9+.
| dpc050505 wrote:
| I've climbed v6 in the gym and 11c sport routes outside.
| There are 5.6 granite pitches that absolutely kick my ass.
| The sandbagged grades are very real in the mountains, and the
| style of climbing is totally different from whatever you see
| in the gym (flaring offwidth cracks are my weakness, the only
| ''gym'' I saw that had anything like it was a shed owned by a
| guy who made first ascents in Li Ming).
| sulam wrote:
| What's a 5.6 route you've felt challenged on? And was it
| the runout that did it, or the actual physical difficulty
| of the moves? I ask because I've done a lot of climbing
| outside and I never ran across something that was graded
| 5.6 but that was as physically demanding as a V6. I _have_
| climbed long, highly runout 5.6 that required good mental
| fortitude.
| photochemsyn wrote:
| There's a great short video of this kind of high-altitude mixed
| rock & ice climbing from a somewhat similar route on Shivling,
| whose summit is 1000 meters lower. Fairly bonkers:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVcugATR8d4
| ChatGTP wrote:
| At those altitudes and temps I don't really see how one could
| wear rock climbing shoes without being in severe pain from
| cold, or worse.
| sulam wrote:
| As other, far more well-informed posters have pointed out,
| you do not do these routes in climbing shoes.
| atoav wrote:
| Reinhold Messner (first guy to solo the Everest without oxygen
| and generally a insane alpinist) would say that the climbing
| part isn't what makes these high elevation mountains hard. It
| is the lack of oxygen which means your brain operates in a fog
| and the simplest of actions like tying your shoes will take
| forever. And that in an environment where a single wrong
| movement can kill you.
|
| Messner and others keep harping on how the hardest part is
| mentally going forward in auch an environment. I would add:
| move yourself forward in such an environment _and_ know when to
| cancel the thing so you won 't die.
| neonate wrote:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20231201210754/https://www.nytim...
| ldjkfkdsjnv wrote:
| The climbs are basically pure dice rolls. Alot of regular human
| beings could climb these mountains, they would just die 80% of
| the time. These climbers might only die 10-20% of the time. But
| they always do in the end. Still, a riviting exhibit of human
| exploration.
| yeahwhatever10 wrote:
| That is how I felt when watching the documentary on Marc-Andre
| Leclerc, eventually the dice were going to roll against him and
| they did.
| dilyevsky wrote:
| You clearly underestimate the amount of skill and tenacity
| involved here. I can tell you these percentages are waaay off
| and more like 100% death sentence for "regular" humans (if they
| can even do the approach). These are like olympic-level
| athletes (gold medalist kind).
| dang wrote:
| Can you please make your substantive points without swipes?
| This is in the site guidelines:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
|
| If you know more than someone else, that's great, but in that
| case please share some of what you know, so the rest of us
| can learn.
|
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor.
| ..
| dilyevsky wrote:
| The original comment also felt like a swipe or at least
| slightly disrespectful so hence my reply. But you're right
| - rules are rules so I edited my comment =)
| hackerlight wrote:
| Agreed on the 100% for regular humans, but what would the %
| be for this calibre of climbers?
| dilyevsky wrote:
| I dont have hard data but definitely nowhere close to
| 10-20% that's just ridiculous. Somewhere like 1 to 10000 on
| routes with very high objective danger would be my guess
| RogerL wrote:
| I replied separately, but this is being written about
| because up to now, every last elite climber said 'nope,
| I'll 100% die on this one'. Well, perhaps there were
| aborted attempts (I'm not aware of any), but you abort when
| it becomes impossible, ie death is looming.
|
| People can quote stats for Himalayan climbs and the such,
| but a climb like this lacks meaningful statistics. It is so
| far from a trudge up Everest, and unequalled, that I don't
| see how to assign a stat. Right now it stands at 0%, which
| is probably not the right number.
| carabiner wrote:
| I'd put this at Nobel prize level of achievement for the
| climbing world. Lifetime of effort plus unique talent, drive,
| focus. Whereas climbing Everest via the standard tourist route
| might be like passing an undergrad calc exam (few months of
| effort with someone teaching you, 80% of people could do it).
|
| Not sure if you'd say "a lot of regular humans" have a Nobel.
| There are a lot of laureates out there, but I mean are they
| regular guys?
| jmcphers wrote:
| Having read a few accounts of what it takes to summit
| Everest, I would guess that the number of people who could
| achieve it is less than half of 80%. The excellent book Into
| Thin Air[0] has a lot more on this (and some thoughts on the
| increased tourism/commercialization of the mountain).
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Into_Thin_Air
| sopchi wrote:
| I don't quite believe the dice roll metaphor tells the whole
| story. It is not all or nothing, it is not how it is done. On
| that subject, I recommend reading the book by Ed Viesturs [1],
| first American to ascend all 14 highest mountains (summits >
| 8000m) without oxygen. His take is: to do all 14, you need to
| come back alive every time. So knowing when to give up on an
| attempt and turn back is key. Above 8000m (reasoning impaired
| by lack of oxygen), when the weather is still good, when you
| are so close to the top, and knowing you will have to wait
| years perhaps for the next opportunity it can be really hard to
| make that decision correctly. And picking a partner with not
| just all the skills bit also the same risk tolerance is vital.
|
| [1]: No Shortcuts to the Top: Climbing the World's 14 Highest
| Peaks (October 2006)
| locacorten wrote:
| I beg to differ.
|
| Regular human beings would die 100% of the time. Not 80.
| FartyMcFarter wrote:
| Exactly, and for multiple reasons too. Fear leading to bad
| decisions, lack of skill, lack of fitness just to name a few.
| arrakeenrevived wrote:
| A "regular human" would die just sleeping at 20,000 feet like
| these people did. You're really underestimating the amount of
| preparation and skill that goes into a feat like this.
|
| Likewise for this part: "The first two days involved about
| 6,000 vertical feet of climbing, 60 meters of rope at a time."
| No "regular human" is even making it 50 feet free climbing up a
| vertical wall, let alone the technical skill required to clip
| the rope, place protection, and manage equipment while climbing
| and working with your partner.
|
| It's really easy to underestimate this stuff, especially if
| you've never actually tried rock climbing or done high altitude
| stuff before. It may look easy, but at around 15,000 feet it
| gets to the point where even the most physically in-shape
| person cannot walk more than a few steps without having to stop
| and take a breath, let alone climb a vertical wall.
|
| Likewise, rock climbing might look easy, but go to a local
| climbing gym and pick a 5.9 or 5.10 (which are about medium
| difficulty) and unless you have past experience climbing, I
| guarantee you won't even make it halfway up. And that's at a
| gym, where everything is easier, and you don't need to worry
| about placing your own protection or carrying ropes.
| lambdaone wrote:
| Indeed. People who don't do these kinds of activity wildly
| overestimate their physical capabilities.
|
| Part of the reason for this, I think, is that Hollywood and
| TV depicts ludicrous levels of acrobatic and athletic
| capability as the norm; apparently normal people in movies
| are depicted catching falling people one-handed, outrunning
| explosions, and so on.
|
| Climbing, even at an enthusiastic amateur level, is much
| harder than non-climbers believe, and I think your suggestion
| that readers try top-roping a 5.9/5.10 to get some idea of
| even beginning climbing difficulty is an excellent idea.
|
| I cannot even imagine the level of dedication and expertise
| it takes to do this sort of feat.
| confidantlake wrote:
| We all do in the end.
| RogerL wrote:
| It's 100%, for everyone. This is being written about because
| until now, despite a community of hyper competitive individuals
| vying for first ascents in extreme environments, _no one_ has
| done this route until now; it was unimaginable, basically, as
| something you could possibly survive. But these mad lads had
| the imagination to see it was possible, and the skill sets to
| achieve it.
|
| As for 'dice rolls', it depends. In climbing there is
| "objective danger" - danger you cannot really control, like
| your route passes under a serac that collapses frequently, and
| "subjective danger" that you can control - you step on a loose
| hold and fall. They spend months planning, trying to reduce the
| objective dangers as much as possible, and of course years of
| training to reduce the subjective dangers. Summarizing all of
| that as a 'dice roll', while it might capture the percentages
| of particular high risk climbs, seems to miss the mark a bit.
| Spend a night in a climbing hut, or hanging in a
| tent/portaledge off a mountain side and it's endless talk about
| this sort of thing. How to master your body, the terrain, and
| often most importantly and hardest, your mind.
| mym1990 wrote:
| This is an amazing achievement, almost unfathomable the level of
| fitness, trust in your teammates, and expertise that they need to
| even have a shot at this thing.
| dilyevsky wrote:
| Nice! I was lucky to witness Jackson on Moose's Tooth in Alaska a
| few years back. He climbed solo (unroped) and caught up with us
| right before the ridge starting like 5 hours later from the camp
| than we did lol! I think i still have some photos around of us
| shooting bb guns in the camp next day
| sizzzzlerz wrote:
| This ranks right up there with Hillary/Norgay first Everest
| summit and Alex Honnold's free-solo climb of El Capitan. Amazing
| feat, guys! Well done.
| ilrwbwrkhv wrote:
| Is K2 fully solved yet?
| snowwrestler wrote:
| It's commercially guided now, unfortunately.
| dilyevsky wrote:
| K2 has finally been successfully climbed in the winter last
| year if you're referring to that
| gambiting wrote:
| "The first two days involved about 6,000 vertical feet of
| climbing, 60 meters of rope at a time."
|
| Can someone explain to me, who is nytimes writing this article
| for, exactly? Only Brits mix units like this, but this is an
| American publication - so what gives? Why not just stick to
| meters or feet throughout and be consistent?
| burkaman wrote:
| This is common in the American climbing community, rope lengths
| are always in meters but people often use feet for
| wall/mountain heights.
|
| 60m is a standard category of rope, so it would be confusing
| (for climbers at least) to call it 196ft or 200ft rope.
|
| It's also common to talk about 4000-footers in New Hampshire
| and 13ers in Colorado, so I guess that's why (some) people
| stick to feet for mountain heights.
|
| I agree it doesn't make sense because sometimes you have to
| convert in your head to see if your rope is long enough, but
| it's just the custom here for whatever reason.
| qwertox wrote:
| This reminded me of the video " _Why does Aviation have SO
| Many UNITS of Measurement?_ " [0] from " _Mentour Now!_ ".
|
| It's generally worth watching since units are an important
| part of our lives.
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBq-WwmQ8KM
| hcrisp wrote:
| Probably referring to pitch lengths. Climbing ropes are
| generally ~60 meters (200 feet), or one pitch.
| frenchy wrote:
| More accurately: probably referring to the length of their
| rope (and thus max pitch lengths). With alpine climbing, the
| actual pitch length can be all over the place due to a
| variety of reasons.
| devjab wrote:
| The whole "feet" thing made it impossible to get any sort of
| scale/height thing right in my head, but it is hilarious that
| they mix the metric system into their crazy mess. I'm not sure
| the Brits would've done it though, I like climbing articles and
| I can't recall ever being this height confused before.
|
| I'm probably some sort of challenged but I really can't
| internalise if 5000 feet is impressive or not. Like it could be
| 20 meters or it could be a 1000. Of course it's fair that an
| American article uses their various "freedom" scales and I tend
| to just "give up" and ignore the numbers I don't understand.
| The article itself does enough to impress the magnitude of
| these climbers achievement without the numbers.
| krisoft wrote:
| > Like it could be 20 meters or it could be a 1000.
|
| Are you proud of being unable to solve this? It would have
| taken you less keypresses to find out than to write your
| message.
|
| Hint: if you want a rough estimate just divide the number of
| feets by 3.
| devjab wrote:
| Not necessarily proud, but the only thing that plays on my
| mind when I have to deal with feet (and inches since those
| are called "thumbs" in my country) is that guy in
| Braveheart going "some men are longer than others".
|
| It is what it is.
| Metacelsus wrote:
| This reminds me of:
| https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/J3wemDGtsy5gzD3xa/toni-kurz-...
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| This has all the pictures: https://archive.is/sXo1V
| bandyaboot wrote:
| I never cease to be amazed by some of these world class climbers.
| The number of elite level attributes that a person has to possess
| to pull off these feats is mind-boggling. Skill, focus, drive,
| cajones...to name a few.
| Aschebescher wrote:
| Archived without paywall: https://archive.ph/sXo1V
| Malime wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36147388
| hasoleju wrote:
| > "but they'll need to accept the likelihood that they're buying
| themselves a one-way ticket."
|
| The sensation of this achievement seems to be mainly grounded in
| the fact, that there was a high probability of death. I
| understand that this thrill is a very good hook for media
| coverage. But as far as I understood from reading, the main
| difficulty was the technical climbing part. Combined with the low
| oxygen atmosphere and low temperature of high altitude.
|
| I really hope that they knew what they were doing and mitigated
| the risk of getting hurt. Maybe sometimes the risk of death is
| exaggerated in this articles to build suspense for the readers.
|
| I think it is bad if the "Risk your life to get famous" part of
| this adventure is stressed too much.
|
| > The first two days involved about 6,000 vertical feet of
| climbing, 60 meters of rope at a time.
|
| As a European used to the metric system reading a sentence like
| this is a real challenge. I don't know why you measure hight of a
| mountain in feet and length of a rope in meters.
| brazzy wrote:
| >But as far as I understood from reading, the main difficulty
| was the technical climbing part. Combined with the low oxygen
| atmosphere and low temperature of high altitude.
|
| The danger of avalanches, weather changes, and the non-
| availability of rescue if anything goes wrong also plays a
| part. Alpine climbing is a package deal of difficulty and
| deadliness, and these aspects are hard to disentangle. Every
| competent alpine climbers does what they can to mitigate risks,
| but there is a very significant amount of risk that cannot be
| mitigated except by not doing difficult alpine climbing.
| rollcat wrote:
| I can share my perspective (downhill longboarding rather than
| climbing, surprisingly lots of parallels, while on average most
| likely less fatal it definitely can get you killed or
| wheelchaired).
|
| There are exactly zero people who do these kinds of sports and
| have a deathwish, because every deathwish almost immediately
| comes true. On top of that, while the sport could technically
| be practiced alone, you really really really need buddies to
| rely on - they're gonna hold your life in their hands, you're
| gonna hold theirs. The "stay safe" mantra is fundamentally
| embedded into the groupthink.
|
| The entire sport *is* risk management. Picking your gear,
| picking the route, picking your friends, knowing (and
| consciously pushing) your limits, knowing when to back off,
| dealing with trauma of injury, of seeing others injured or
| dead.
|
| Media of course can and will toot the "these insane men" horn,
| thrill sells and an impartial report would be boring. We're
| guilty of this too! The boys in the crew often shoot cool
| videos to attract clicks and sponsorships, it's how the best of
| us turn the hobby into a trade.
|
| We're not motivated by danger, we're wary of it as a constraint
| under which we can express ourselves.
| dsauerbrun wrote:
| climbing ropes are typically measured in meters and come in
| increments of 10(ie. 50, 60, 70, 80). that's likely the reason
| they used metric for the rope length... however I will agree
| with you that it's a weird choice given this is meant for a
| mainstream audience
| snowwrestler wrote:
| The pure difficulty of the technical climbing was not
| remarkable.
|
| The grade they gave was M7, AI5, A0. M7 is moderate, AI5 is
| moderate but strenuous, and A0 is the very easiest A grade. The
| details of what these grades mean are discussed in other
| comments. If there was a climb with that grade close to the
| road in the U.S. Rocky Mountains, it would be considered a fun
| but not-too-challenging day of climbing by these guys.
|
| But combine this moderate climbing grade with: the weight of a
| week's worth of camping supplies; the very high altitude; the
| very cold temperatures; the constant threat of terrible
| weather; the constant threat of avalanche or ice fall; and the
| very far distance from any kind of help... and you begin to see
| how it is a remarkable achievement.
|
| The risk of death was high, yes. But it's not like playing
| Russian Roulette or running across a busy highway or something.
| The hazards are inherently part of the climbing goal, and a
| huge part of the achievement is in how the risks were
| mitigated: peak physical fitness; long climbing experience; the
| lightest gear; the best weather forecasting; the best planning
| and logistics, etc.
|
| Metaphorically: you can't build a plane with the same safety
| margins you use to a build a bridge. And you can't get a rocket
| to orbit with the same safety margins you use for a passenger
| plane. The harder the objective (physically), the smaller the
| safety margin is available, and the more skill and expertise it
| takes to make it work.
| ur-whale wrote:
| With pictures:
|
| https://archive.is/j3zRC
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-12-02 23:02 UTC)