Attempting the first unsupported, unassisted solo crossing of Antarctic landmass | Hacker News Reader

Attempting the first unsupported, unassisted solo crossing of Antarctic landmass

shackletonsolo.org

34 pointshownottowrite17 comments

Having made three trips to the South Pole with the National Science Foundation, I've seen first-hand the impact private traverses can have on people. When all goes well, it's wonderful but when it doesn't go well it is the lives of the polar program's rescue team these people are risking.

The continent is full of cravasses, fractures in the ice hundreds of feet deep and potentially tens of feet across, invisible because they are covered with snow, and large enough to swallow entire vehicles or teams. The third year I was down there, a rescue was required in which the leader of the rescue team dropped into five separate cravasses trying to get to a group of "explorers." That was just his count, not including the rest of the team. Yes, he was roped off and knew how to progress through a risky environment, but every one of those falls in a remote and hazardous environment was a very real risk to him and his team. The teams have helicopters, and ski-equipped twin otters, but safe landing sites can be far removed from the location of the team needing rescue.

The history of Scott and Amundsen shows just how difficult and dangerous the continent is to cross, and it remains that way today. If this guy wants to risk his life, that's his business, but he's also potentially risking the lives of the team that will get called in to save him if he gets into danger.

What's the best solution, then? Some kind of "Do Not Resuscitate" that should be used for people going on personal expeditions who don't wish to impose that burden?

Or mandatory rescue insurance.

An interesting and somewhat related article. The Iceland rescue service gets inundated with rescue requests from tourists. There is talk of collecting "rescue tax" from tourists.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/11/09/life-is-rescues

I read that in print (the New Yorker is one of a very small number of magazines worth a subscription). SAR in the United States is largely volunteers backed up by the military, i.e. it only works thanks to generous people and an institution that can do things like Starfish Prime [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime

I'd agree if the rescue team was comprised of draftees, but I'm guessing that it is an all volunteer group that is aware of the responsibility before signing up. The complaint has the same sound to me as cops that moan about the risks involved with their work.

These crews have other responsibilities and legitimate scientific and exploratory teams to assist. A random adventurer is adding unnecessary complication to their lives for the sake of glory, vanity.

None of that changes the fact that it is a voluntary and self appointed responsibility. If you can't do your thing at the south pole without worrying about getting permission, filling out the requisite forms, paying the various fees and bills, and act in accordance with the will of the mass of the public... where can you? Is there anywhere left on Earth where you can just be?

The middle of the ocean is about the only place you can go if you really want to screw up royally, be totally helpless, and have no one come to your aid (and even there any passing ship is going to try to help you). If you are on land, it pretty much doesn't matter where you are, there is someone who will be pilloried by the media if they fail to come to your aid when you are in a crisis. That's mostly a good thing, but it does mean you are asking someone else to risk their life, whether they want to or not, each time you decide to risk your own.

> Having made three trips to the South Pole with the National Science Foundation, ...

I hope you appreciate how fortunate you are to have had that opportunity. You essentially went to space.

If you don't mind my asking, do you know (or can you surmise) how Will Steger and his team made it across Antarctica?

I remember following their dog-sled-ski traverse in the papers while living in MN. But, I don't remember reading how they handled crossing the crevasses.

This is pretty nuts: even going fairly hungry, he will start with at least 150 lbs of food, so he's probably starting with 200-225 lbs of stuff, climbing from near sea level to the 10,000-ft Antarctic plateau.

It's also pretty dumb:

> Henry will make the first solo descent of the Shackleton Glacier.

While going unroped on a glacier can be far safer than is often preached, it's not something to brag about. Falling into a crevasse is much less predictable than falling off a cliff, so this guy "free soloing" a hairy glacier is much more like Russian Roulette than e.g. Alex Honnold free soloing Half Dome.

Wow, only nasty comments so far, why? He is putting himself on stage here, he will win this or not, he can die or not, he can go mad or not (and that is, having some experience with this stuff, the biggest danger). It's an interesting way to live a full life. I am biased - I dream of crossing the Northwestern passage by kayak - but I can't understand why somebody would be nasty with this guy from the start.

I hope Mr. Worsley has read "The Worst Journey in the World" to familiarize himself with the dangers he will face.

80 days. Good bio for a polar explorer [0] plenty of pre-planning and contingency for exfil.

[0] http://shackletonsolo.org/bio/

He's dead.

Would give an impressive new meaning to 'ghost writer':

http://shackletonsolo.org/2015/12/07/day-24-get-up-early-and...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com