7 ms·

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

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 3y ago
> 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 3y ago
  would you mind elaborating or linking to this grading notation? not sure what to even look for
  - whymauri 3y ago
    This is a mixed route, so the comment above cites three grading scales: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_(climbing) 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 3y ago
      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.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - jwagenet 3y ago
    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/ https://alaskaiceclimbing.com/climb-ratings/
    - whymauri 3y ago
      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 3y ago
      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.
KittenInABox 3y ago
> 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__ 3y ago
  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 3y ago
    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__ 3y ago
      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 3y ago
> 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 3y ago
  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 3y ago
    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 3y ago
      Sport vs trad grades outdoors are very different animals.
- zrezzed 3y ago
  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
photochemsyn 3y ago
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 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVcugATR8d4
ChatGTP 3y ago
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 3y ago
  As other, far more well-informed posters have pointed out, you do not do these routes in climbing shoes.
atoav 3y ago
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.

wetmore 3y ago

> 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 3y ago
would you mind elaborating or linking to this grading notation? not sure what to even look for
- whymauri 3y ago
  This is a mixed route, so the comment above cites three grading scales: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_(climbing) 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 3y ago
    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.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- jwagenet 3y ago
  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/ https://alaskaiceclimbing.com/climb-ratings/
  - whymauri 3y ago
    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 3y ago
    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.

KittenInABox 3y ago

> 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__ 3y ago
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 3y ago
  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__ 3y ago
    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 3y ago

> 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 3y ago
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 3y ago
  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 3y ago
    Sport vs trad grades outdoors are very different animals.
zrezzed 3y ago
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

photochemsyn 3y ago

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 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVcugATR8d4

ChatGTP 3y ago

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 3y ago
As other, far more well-informed posters have pointed out, you do not do these routes in climbing shoes.

atoav 3y ago

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.