Archive for March, 2009
Leaving Kathmandu
March 30th, 2009
Hi, I’m doing a final test of my technology, making sure I can post text and photos via email. It’s Monday morning here, and I leave tomorrow to start the trek. Yesterday was a busy day. I was able to meet up with Pemba Gyalje Sherpa, a central figure in last year’s K2 drama. He arranged for me to meet the families of the two Sherpas who died last summer, and I was able to give them the money donated by Chris Warner, Fredrik Strang, and many of you out there. Pasang’s son Dawa (age 14 months) and Jumic’s son Mingma (born the day before his father died) are the real beneficiaries of your support, and they pass along their thanks.
While I’m climbing alone above Base Camp, I will be trekking and sharing Base Camp with a small group of climbers. Ian (UK) arrived the same day I did, and we’ve been having dinner etc. together. Yesterday, Joe (USA) and Pam (UK) arrived and the four of us will trek in together. Another climber (Valerie, UK) is already on the approach. While I don’t usually post info about other people, I’ll be hanging out with this crew so now you now there names.
Lots of people are rolling into town, it rained hard last night, and Jamie is getting copies of my book into the book shops here. The bags are repacked for the trip to Base Camp, and today is the last day to get last minute items. I’ll likely be able to do a short post while trekking, but if not I’ll be back in about a week or so.
Posted in Everest 2009 | Comments (0)
In Kathmandu
March 28th, 2009
I’m in Kathmandu, all my luggage arrived, and I’m getting organized over the next few days to fly into Lukla on March 31. By the way, look below for part 2 of my discussion of technical climbing vs. extreme altitude.
The tourist season is off to a slow start (that darn economy again). Most teams headed for the Tibet side of Everest have changed their plans as the Chinese are once again playing politics with climbers. So the south (Nepal) side will be crowded, although somebody said there will be fewer climbers than last year–I really don’t know.
The new Maoist government is attempting all sorts of social control measures, the most pertinent being an early (11:30pm) curfew in Thamel, the tourist area. While I’m normally long asleep by then, the joys of jet lag make that hour quite reasonable right now. So we were at a bar last night, and as the police went by they blew out the candles and we all had to be quiet. We’re in no danger as tourists, but the bars could be closed down.
They use candles because Kathmandu is load shedding, which just means they turn the power off 8 hours a day. You always walk around with a flashlight in your pocket! One might ask why the government is worrying about tourist curfews when they can’t provide electricity…
The weather is nice but cool (t shirt during the day, light jacket at night). I’ve met a number of friends who are in town, and most are scattering to the hills over the next few days. Yesterday was lost to jet lag (I slept all afternoon), so today I’m meeting more folks, shopping, and charging my electronics while the power is on. And maybe sleep all night?
Tags: Everest 2009
Posted in Everest 2009 | Comments (0)
Technical difficulty vs. extreme altitude part 2
March 28th, 2009
In my last post, I talked about how elite performance on technical terrain is similar to elite performance at altitude. But as we look at the development of these two games over the past 50 years, we see two quite different patterns.
I’ll use technical rock climbing as an example. In the 1950s the walls of Yosemite were originally climbed using artificial aid. This means that some bits of metal were hammered into the rock and the climber suspended his body from that to reach up and hammer yet another thing into the rock. As ascending these walls was a venture into the unknown, this technique made sense as it provided a necessary degree of security.
As it became clear that you could aid climb virtually any slice of rock, rock climbers changed the rules of the game by emphasizing free climbing, which means that they no longer hung from a piton in the rock but used only their hands and feet for upward progress. While this was more difficult and less secure, advances in equipment and technique meant that this approach was preferred due to the increased speed it provided. Climbers could further up the ante by dispensing with climbing partners and climbing roped but solo, or even climb solo without a rope. The whole point is that the game of rock climbing was modified as a result of improvement in equipment and technique. A similar progression in technique and style has taken place in ice climbing over the past decade or so. The rules of the game have been brought in line with the equipment and technique of today. And these rules really arise out of a need to retain an element of uncertainty in the outcome–not everyone can climb every route.
High-altitude climbing (I’m talking about the world’s highest peaks here) has seen even greater improvement in equipment and techniques, but has the average climber changed the game in response to this? No! In fact, the average climber on an 8000m peak is even more reliant on old-school style. They use more fixed ropes, more porters, more oxygen, and more guides than the climbers of the 1950s ever did. In a perverse way this is due to the improvements in equipment: rope is lighter, oxygen gear is lighter, and so on, so more can be carried up the hill.
The primary culprit here may be the emergence of the guided high-altitude commercial expedition. These folks make their money by getting as many people to the top as possible, and the last thing I’d want (if I was a guide) would be to increase the uncertainty in the outcome (ie the summit). Many of their clients are not ‘climbers’ in the strict sense, just like I’m not a ‘driver’ in the Indy Car sense. As a result, these clients don’t understand the stylistic and ethical considerations involved in their mode of ascent.
You might ask, why do rock climbers or ice climbers have a stronger sense of style? Frankly, it’s enforced by the climbing community. If you walk up to a popular rock climb and start hammering in gear, you’ll hear about it. If you say you climbed a particular route, you better make sure nobody saw you ‘cheating’ in some way.
The high altitude game has myriad risks and is very expensive, so it’s hard to blame individuals for style violations. But why not try to use a better style that reflects our ultralight equipment, knowledge of high altitude illness and physiology, and the improvements in our overall technical ability. This brings me back to the statement on style on my main Everest page.
Tags: Everest 2009
Posted in Everest 2009 | Comments (0)
Technical difficulty vs. extreme altitude
March 21st, 2009
The American climbing community has always placed technical success far above success at extreme altitude. The similarities and differences of these two aspects of climbing deserves some comment.
By technical success, I mean the ability to climb steeper and more difficult sections of rock, snow, or ice. You can walk up the stairs (technically easy) or try to walk up the banister (way hard). What does it take to climb difficult terrain? You need to have the right combination of anatomical and physiological traits, you need to train properly, and you need to have the proper mental state.
What does it take to be successful at extreme altitude, say by climbing Everest without supplemental oxygen? You need to have the right combination of anatomical and physiological traits, you need to train properly, and you need to have the proper mental state.
It’s possible to practice your technical abilities on small rock or ice cliffs, which may be easily accessible even in the flatlands. In contrast, it’s only possible to ‘practice’ your altitude abilities at extreme altitudes.
A much wider range of skills are needed to be successful at altitude. The mental challenges are much more diverse at altitude and you spent a lot of psychic energy just forcing yourself to eat, get dressed, and do the tasks of daily life. The mental challenges of technical climbing are different; gravity is an ever-present force waiting to whisk you to injury (or worse), so the mental challenges tend to be very immediate and focused on the mechanics of movement.
So in most ways, these two aspects of climbing really aren’t all that different. Since anyone can go to an indoor climbing facility and ‘go climbing,’ the industry and media focus on this type of climbing isn’t surprising.
But those who excel at technical climbing aren’t better than those who excel at extreme altitude; they just have a different skill set. The truly great climbers are those who climb hard at extreme altitude.
Posted in Everest 2009 | Comments (0)
Expedition primer added
March 12th, 2009
I’ve posted a short illustrated explanation of how a modern expedition generally works; click the Expedition Primer link to the left. If you don’t know the difference between low-altitude and high-altitude porters, or how we arrange to get all of the stuff to Base Camp, this is for you. I’ll tinker with it a bit more before I leave for Everest.
Posted in Everest 2009, The Altitude Experience | Comments (0)
Everest 2009
March 7th, 2009
Please follow my 2009 Mt. Everest attempt on this blog. You can receive email notification of a new post by clicking on the ‘subscribe to posts’ tab above. I hope to be sending more reports back this year that I did last summer on K2.
More information on my goals can be found at my Everest page.
I will be leaving March 24 and returning June 7 at the latest.
Unless you have received express written consent in 2009 to use words, graphics, or photos from this blog and web site on your own web site, you must abide by US copyright law. All materials ©Mike Farris
Tags: Everest 2009
Posted in Everest 2009 | Comments (0)