Time to un-bolt Mount Everest?

Eric Engberg wrote: Classic arm chair mountainerring - ranting - confusion of "Steps" on the north and south sides of Everest. Thinking bolts are involved. Why don't you all read a little more and post a little less? At least until you can get a few facts straight.

Bolt is being used as a metaphor for fixed gear (i.e. ladders, fixed lines). Like we all thought Everest was some giant sport route where the first pitch requires 900 draws. That's the real reason to bring a Sherpa, need someone to carry your draws.

Andrew Gram wrote:Just curious, but how many folks in this thread have been above 20K before? I'm guessing none.

Or is the better question, How many people have climbed a ladder? I have not been above 20k but know and climb with two that have (and trained with another when I lived in Anchorage), including Denali where you hoist 70 pounds on your back, pull 90, and shuttle gear up, without a ladder.

Just because something is hard doesn't mean you should take shortcuts. Would you consider it a succesful summit/climb if a person carried your gear, you climbed a few ladders, and a helicopter took you down (a helicopter can now reach the summit of Everest)?

Just for the record; There is no laddar at the hillary step. The laddar is on the chinese route on the north side...

rging wrote: Or is the better question, How many people have climbed a ladder? I have not been above 20k but know and climb with two that have (and trained with another when I lived in Anchorage), including Denali where you hoist 70 pounds on your back, pull 90, and shuttle gear up, without a ladder. Just because something is hard doesn't mean you should take shortcuts. Would you consider it a succesful summit/climb if a person carried your gear, you climbed a few ladders, and a helicopter took you down (a helicopter can now reach the summit of Everest)?

Wow, you're not just unaware of what you're talking about, you're unaware that you're unaware of what you're talking about.

rging wrote: Or is the better question, How many people have climbed a ladder?

Even if the Hillary step had a ladder, which it does not - it has fixed lines that you half climb/half jumar, you have absolutely no frame of reference unless you've actually been at very high altitudes.

rging wrote: I have not been above 20k but know and climb with two that have (and trained with another when I lived in Anchorage), including Denali where you hoist 70 pounds on your back, pull 90, and shuttle gear up, without a ladder.

If the trade route on Denali had obstacles anything like the Hillary Step on the South Col or the Second Step on the North Col, there would absolutely be fixed lines or ladders on it. Also, if you are shuttling loads on Denali and have 70 pounds in your pack on any carry, you have no idea what you are doing. You really need to get some more background in mountaineering before you comment on it publicly.

rging wrote: Just because something is hard doesn't mean you should take shortcuts. Would you consider it a succesful summit/climb if a person carried your gear, you climbed a few ladders, and a helicopter took you down (a helicopter can now reach the summit of Everest)?

Once you get some climbing experience you'll understand that there are grey areas, and that people using a fixed line on a chokepoint on a trade route is nothing like getting plucked off the summit by a helicopter, and that the heli is not a natural extension of the use of fixed lines.

I wish there were fewer people on Everest, and in particular I wish that there were very few or no guided parties on Everest. That is more of a political question than anything though - as long as the economy of the region is based on large numbers of climbers passing through nothing will change. Guides, sherpas, and private trip climbers are more than capable of fixing lines on the hillary step for their party. The traffic jams you see now are nothing compared to what they would be if the lines were stripped on the south side, and the ladder removed on the north side, with every party setting their own. Fixed lines on high traffic peaks with choke points are a necessity - we just don't have much of that kind of terrain in the US so casual climbers don't have experience with it. It certainly happens everywhere in the Alps though, which is a good lower altitude approximation of what the situation is up on Everest.

It is funny to read all of this armchair mountaineering criticism on rock climbing forums though. It isn't really any better informed than the mouth breathers hand-wringing on cnn.com or other non-climbing medium.

The Dread Pirate Killis wrote: Mobley, interesting that you're both an admin violating Guideline #1, flagrantly, and that you seem to be knee-deep in St George/Mesquite gossip from a couple of years ago. It was three-hanging a .12b my buddy was projecting, btw. That's the only climb I had the privelege of being watched by your close personal friend on. Am I correct in thinking that this post is from the same Mobley who claimed a near-epic fall from Disco Duck .10a in LCC? Since you've thrown down the grade-equals-worth argument in a forum about Everest issues, just for context? Since mobley's an admin, this post will be deleted. Hope those that saw it will have enjoyed. In response to your post, I'd take a bolt chopper over someone abusing their position to insult a stranger any day.

Holy shit, someone needs to get this guy some Johnson and Johnson's No More Tears and a box of tampons.

Is he really that full of himself that he takes himself THAT seriously? No one cares bro...

jon weekley wrote:Just for the record; There is no laddar at the hillary step. The laddar is on the chinese route on the north side...

My mistake, I meant to say its on the second step where a Chinese group put it up in the 70s. I wonder if it's a Chinese made ladder? Only good thing they ever made if it is.

Andrew Gram wrote: Even if the Hillary step had a ladder, which it does not - it has fixed lines that you half climb/half jumar, you have absolutely no frame of reference unless you've actually been at very high altitudes. If the trade route on Denali had obstacles anything like the Hillary Step on the South Col or the Second Step on the North Col, there would absolutely be fixed lines or ladders on it. Also, if you are shuttling loads on Denali and have 70 pounds in your pack on any carry, you have no idea what you are doing. You really need to get some more background in mountaineering before you comment on it publicly. Once you get some climbing experience you'll understand that there are grey areas, and that people using a fixed line on a chokepoint on a trade route is nothing like getting plucked off the summit by a helicopter, and that the heli is not a natural extension of the use of fixed lines. I wish there were fewer people on Everest, and in particular I wish that there were very few or no guided parties on Everest. That is more of a political question than anything though - as long as the economy of the region is based on large numbers of climbers passing through nothing will change. Guides, sherpas, and private trip climbers are more than capable of fixing lines on the hillary step for their party. The traffic jams you see now are nothing compared to what they would be if the lines were stripped on the south side, and the ladder removed on the north side, with every party setting their own. Fixed lines on high traffic peaks with choke points are a necessity - we just don't have much of that kind of terrain in the US so casual climbers don't have experience with it. It certainly happens everywhere in the Alps though, which is a good lower altitude approximation of what the situation is up on Everest. It is funny to read all of this armchair mountaineering criticism on rock climbing forums though. It isn't really any better informed than the mouth breathers hand-wringing on cnn.com or other non-climbing medium.

I think the concept being debated here are the short cuts taken by alot of climbers, especially on Everest. Personally I like to only use what I've placed myself and to me, a ladder, fixed rope, etc is cheating myself and my goals. Of course there's been times where it just made sense to use some of these things but I wish I wouldn't have.
For a micro analogy of my thought process I will supply the following anecdote; When I was training (for various races) running, I refused to cut the corners on the sidewalk. Why? Because cutting the corner is short cutting my goals. Would it make a difference in the whole grand scheme of things? No, but it's the attitude that counts. We all make compromises in our climbing, shoes, ropes, chalk, etc but personally I draw the line as often as humanly possible at using fixed gear. Even if money wasn't an issue I wouldn't climb Everest even given the chance if I had to use those types of tactics.

In sum, it seems apparent to me that Everest has been compromised on almost every conceivable level and most "climbers" cut the corners on the sidewalk any chance they get. Personally I can't respect those types of people because they don't respect the challenge and their only focus is the glory of "climbing" the tallest mountain in the world so they can drop the story at their next cocktail hour. It seems that the only goal is to impress other people, I for one, am not impressed.

For a non-corner cutting bad ass mother fucker, Google Goran Kropp

Andrew Gram wrote: Also, if you are shuttling loads on Denali and have 70 pounds in your pack on any carry, you have no idea what you are doing. You really need to get some more background in mountaineering before you comment on it publicly.

It's not if; every expedition up Denali shuttles gear to reduce load and acclimiatize unless a group is coming off some of the bigger climbs and don't need to acclimatize. Due to the massive verical and horrid weather you had better have extra supplies up there. Maybe the three people I know that summited are just wimps and you could cover all 18,000 vertical in a day or two with 20 pounds.

P.S. the load weights were exagerated slightly but that's how you impress your non climbing buddies.

Even the 'bad ass' individuals, which there are some great ones, use the fixed ladders across the Khumba ice fall

Climbing Fascist wrote: It seems that the only goal is to impress other people, I for one, am not impressed.

Well put sir, well put.

Woolymammoth wrote:Even the 'bad ass' individuals, which there are some great ones, use the fixed ladders across the Khumba ice fall

The real badasses are over on K2.

Tristan B wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wildest_Dream Conrad Anker said it went at like 5.10. And Leo Houlding said it felt 5.9 but he was on TR.

I just listened to an interview with Ueli Steck and he said it was a 3. A european grade three is like 5.4! Seemed a little downgraded but I guess I will never be so i don't really care, haha

Yeah, I read somewhere (can't remember exactly where, but it was a credible source, and something about the FA of Everest) that the Step is really only about 5.2.

Owen Darrow wrote: I just listened to an interview with Ueli Steck and he said it was a 3. A european grade three is like 5.4! Seemed a little downgraded but I guess I will never be so i don't really care, haha

Pretty sure about this...
Anker did the 2nd step on the North Ridge in the movie (where Mallory went)
Steck did the South Col route which has the Hillary step (where Hillary went on the FA)

2 different routes.

rging wrote: It's not if; every expedition up Denali shuttles gear to reduce load and acclimiatize unless a group is coming off some of the bigger climbs and don't need to acclimatize. Due to the massive verical and horrid weather you had better have extra supplies up there. Maybe the three people I know that summited are just wimps and you could cover all 18,000 vertical in a day or two with 20 pounds. P.S. the load weights were exagerated slightly but that's how you impress your non climbing buddies.

I've climbed lots of big peaks so i'm very familiar with shuttling. I don't have more than 30 pounds or so in each load I shuttle though. Your exaggeration was off by an order of magnitude, which leads me to believe you don't really know what you are talking about.

Your race training analogy is really goofy. You don't cut corners when you are training because you are, well, training and the mileage is good. When you are racing, I doubt you are always taking the outside corner to maximize your experience, and if you are i don't imagine you win very often.

Andrew Gram wrote: I've climbed lots of big peaks so i'm very familiar with shuttling. I don't have more than 30 pounds or so in each load I shuttle though. Your exaggeration was off by an order of magnitude, which leads me to believe you don't really know what you are talking about. Your race training analogy is really goofy. You don't cut corners when you are training because you are, well, training and the mileage is good. When you are racing, I doubt you are always taking the outside corner to maximize your experience, and if you are i don't imagine you win very often.

I think you're confusing two different users?

No good zings in this thread yet, but it is a hackneyed topic.

Yeah, I conflated rging and killis. Sorry about that. Killis's racing analogy is really goofy.

JLP wrote: After seeing Chris Warner's documentary, I wouldn't say this. It really seems to me all the major and well known peaks over there are a trainwreck of ego and wankery.

Most people consider it the most difficult mountain in the world. Granted they still use Sherpas to help with gear but if you look at the numbers its about 100 to 1, Everest in the 3,000 range vs K2 in the 300 range. K2 is dangerous because of the technical terain, Everest because of the people on it (aside from altitude of course). I don't know why I am so curious but I can't stop wondering what percentage of people would not be there if it weren't for all the dumbing down, so to speak.

Andrew Gram wrote:Yeah, I conflated rging and killis. Sorry about that. Killis's racing analogy is really goofy.

Are you saying that Climbing Fascist and Killis are one and the same? Now that would be an amusing discovery.