Rodchester

Are you saying you want something more than the normal alpine climbing pack? Something for a weeklong trip with heavier loads? While many of the packs pointed out by others are good packs most are true alpine packs with a medium sized to smaller volume. Also, if you plan on humping a weeks worth of weight I would want a frame, not just a foam pad. I have never used the McHale packs, though they have a good rep. One friend got one about ten years ago and never really liked it. Another had one and loved it. You might want to look at: http://www.arcteryx.com/packs/khamsin/khamsin62.asp http://www.arcteryx.com/packs/bora/bora65.asp http://www.danadesign.com/packs/arclight/redirect.htm http://www.gregorypacks.com/prod/frame_esc.html http://www.lowealpine.com/Products/Detail.asp?ProductTypeID=10&ProductGroupID=174&Position=3&SpecificActivityID= http://thenorthface.com/index_flash.html I would take a close look at the Kamsin 62. I have never used it, but it seems to me to fit the needs that you described. Good luck.

I had a lightweight Camp/Lowe helmet years ago. It was light. But it did not hod up to the ue and abuse. Now I have an Ecrin Roc helmet by Petzl. It is twice as heavy (I think) but it is very durable, comfortable, and easy to size. I'll be willing to bet it WAY outlasts the lightweight one. I wear my bucket almost all of the time.

In order to be a good guide you need to be a good/strong/experienced climber, but you also must be good at working with people. This is much like any school. Teachers are not usually the best in thier field. The best lawyers are not teaching law school, they are out making the big bucks. This holds true to many professions/fields. A mathmatical genious is not usually the best basic algebra teacher. A guide like any teacher needs to be able to communicate the information effectively. You don't need someone that can climb 5.12 trad at high altitude to teach a newbie how to clip a bolt. You don't need Jeff Lowe to teach someone how to self arrest on 35 degree snow. This raises one of the issues with certification. Just because a guide knows the techingues and thier application, doesn't necessarliy mean he is an effective communicator. Many very competant guides in the states have not pursued any form of certification. Though it appears that is the wave of the future.

erik: Hmmm. I don't recall saying it was anything other than a business. You know why? It is. Not sure I got your post. What do you mean by "charging forward towards elitism"? You use it right after "a herd/cattle tendency"? Are you saying guide companies are elitist with a herd mentality? Seems to me these two conflict. Maybe I am reading your post incorrectly? Also you stated "it should be humbling job where the clients wishes and safty are considered before anything else" Are these two things one in the same? What if a clients' wishes are not safe? I'm not really sure what you are trying to say erik, and I am not trying to pick a bitch session. I just don't see how encouraging someone to be aware of what they are getting and what they are paying for, that they should asked questions to be informed, and get the most for thier bucks. If that is wrong I highly encourage beefcider to be wrong. Be informed, ask questions, be wrong brother. Beefcider: Remember that these courses are generally basic courses. Erik asked: 1) how much thinking do the guides let you do??? 2) do they give you scenarios that allow you to practive learned skills??? especially without their interferance?? 3) are they open to allowing you some type of (albeit limited) opinion on route finding or route choice??? do they allow you to lead in a controlled enviroment?? These are good points...but these courses are basic courses. You are goinbg to learn basic lkevel techigues and information. Sure most good courses will allow the students to take a much more hands on approach than the "summit" climbs. That was my point in the first post. No good guide is going to let you just start doing your own thing without his/her interference. Saftey dictates a certain amount of control and guidance in these courses. Thats why they call them guides. Good luck and have fun. Be wrong brother, be wrong.

I use a similar system to AlpineK. Also I have seen many guys using the little talk-about radios. They seem to work great on an apline rock climb. 2 cents

You really have to differentiate between a "summit" trip and a course/school. Most guide services offer a summit climb where the focus is on taking the Walter Mitty types to the top of something. The idea is to only teach Walter just enough to not get him or others killed. Basicaly, if you fall self arrest and stay there until your guide says different. On the other hand the actual courses or schools tend to focus on learning the skills required to climb the peak your self. The 5/6 days courses generally focus on glacier travel and basic mountaineering. If you want to go the next step I know that Mountain Madness (yes I have a connection with them) and AAI each offer very good 13 day course that focus on most all aspects of glacier travel and alpine rock too. These are much more comprehensive courses than the 5/6 day courses offered by RMI. I would look closely at the cost difference. If RMI tells you that their course is more expensive because it also involves a summit attempt, I would look elsewhere. It may be that MMI and AAI 13 day courses are just a little bit more expensive but you get so much more instruction. Then again maybe not. Price them out. RMI does hire competant guides that are good instructors. There are a lot of posters here that think they know all about guiding and could do it better. They can't, that is why they're posting here. There are a lot of posters that just bitch about guiding in general. Ignore them, everyone else does. Whatever course you take post a review on it after you take it. Good luck. http://www.alpineascents.com/cascades-13day.asp http://www.mountainmadness.com/alpine/alpine.htm See how these 13 day schools compare to RMI's 6 day. Also always look at what comes with it. Do you have to bring your own food? How about gear? Ask all the questions. [ 03-11-2002: Message edited by: Rodchester ]

Hands down, Second Ascent in Ballard at 5209 Ballard Ave. NW. Feathered Friends also rocks and is the best down there is any where REI. Ever heard of it. Web based: www.campmor.comwww.sierratradingpost.com

I will say this. I can see both sides in the access versus restrict access debate. I must say that I am all for leaving areas roadless be and even returning some areas to roadless status. I am not into banning the humans or anything like that. When a road washes out or a bridge is ACTUALLY no longer viable, they should review the need, utlitity, and cost of vehicle access. Maybe it should be turned back into a roasdless area? The dashboard crowd has plenty of areas to drive through and to. The idea that, because the bridge is out no one can walk the road? That is pure bullshit. I feel like going out there and walking it just to say FO. The reality is that certain areas are and should remain beyond the reach of the dashboard crowd. Al Bundy and Ned Flanders are simply not made to be in the wilderness. They are safer in thier cars. We need to preserve the wilderness and even return some lands back to wilderness. I undertstand access for all, but how about wheelchair ramps up Liberty Bell? Should the wheeled person be denied access? That is akin to me bolting a ladder up some route that I can't lead and saying I shouldn't be denied access to it. Face it, Al Bundy belongs on his couch and that bastard Ned belongs in church. If Al or Ned want to go into the wilderness, they will just have to get out of thier cars. I don't think this is selfish. I know I got off topic and that this spills over to the debate about the road on the west side of Rainier, but that is my 2 cents.

Mr. Radon: This info is based on understanding and I am not claiming to know it all. So take it with a grain of salt. "I wonder how many "independent/amateur" climbers are turned away each year because there is no room on the guided routes because of the guided parties?" Actually this would be easy to calculate. It is my understanding that each time a guide compnay leads a climber it is charged for a "user day." Each user day is a spot on a route that cannot be used by an "amatuer" as you/they say. Assuming the routes are always full (they certainly are full in July and August). Each spot/user day is one that an amatuer cannot climb, at least on that route. Each route has a maximum capacity of climbers that the NPS has calculated as safe, kind of a carrying capacity. "Guides can go to plenty of other place to train." The training on the lower slopes should not count against the number allowed on a route. I believe that is the case, as long as they stay below 10,000 feet. I think what is being suggested is that the lowers slopes be open to guide companies conducting crevase type schools and snow schools. my 2 cents

I know there are many of you out there that REALLY do not like guiding. But the fact of the matter is that guiding is as old as climbing. Another fact of the matter is that guiding on Rainier is here to stay. Like it or not. If we got rid of RMI and the Emmons gang, renegade guiding would be the only alternative. This would of course leave the park service with no way to "police" the mountain. They would have no control over the guides and thier practices. I do believe that the park should open up some routes to other guide companies, but it should not create a free for all. I also think the use of the lower slopes by guide companies for schools and seminars is a good idea. I think RMI for the most part does one hell of a job. They are helpful, when help is really needed on the mountain. I know they screw up occaisionally, and they have pissed me off a time or two as well. But what are the alternatives? 1) Get rid of guiding?2) Limit it further, driving up prices?3) Open the mountain up to all guides, anarchy?4) Others? Just thinking out loud here and trying to create a good diologue. I really can't say I am sold either way. This may be a good thread. But I have to go to a CLE. So...spray away. That means you too DRU!!!

I estimate that the chute/pearly gates area can be anywhere from 35 to 45 depending on conditions. I seriously doubt that it gets over 45 degrees. I walked down it last weekend and remember thinking that if it were any steeper you couldn't walk down it. I have been down it three times and up it once. Each time I would say it was 40 degrees. 50 degrees? Get off the crack pipe. [ 03-08-2002: Message edited by: Rodchester ]

I simply use glacier glases that are prescription. You wear glacier glasses when the sun is up, so just make them prescription glasses. Sun is down, wear your regular glasses. Most everyone I mountaineer with that has glasses does it this way. Contacts suck for mountaineering. They dry out, they bother my eyes, they are a pain in the ass to keep clean up there, the extended wear just don't stay clear. I do wear contacts when I climb water ice or sometimes at the crags. I just have too many concerns over the whole eye surgery thing. Fact is we just don't know enough about how the surgery effects the eye at altitude. Sure it has changed quite a bit since Beck weathers had hid problem on Everest, but has the new methods reallt been tested? So, if you are serious about altitude, I mean over 20,000, then I would be concerned. [ 03-08-2002: Message edited by: Rodchester ]

I am presently reading Five Miles High about the 1938 small team attempt on K2. I am half way and it is a good book. For anyone that is a fan of the Tetons there is a book called "The Grand Conspiracy" by Bonney. This is basically a history book of climbing in the Tetons that also squarely takes on the calims of "first ascent" by Billy Owen. It is not a finger pointing type of accusation, but a very well researched and backed up agruement that the Grand was climbed far earlier by a team of two. If you have climbed the dog route, "Owens-Spaulding," on the Grand you will like this book. Without knowledge of the Tetons the book may still be interesting, but with it you will truely understand the arguments of both sides. Every Teton fan should read this book.

I have a pair of the 5.10 Mountain Masters and I love them. They hike well and climb well too. I have made them last by ONLY using them for alpine climbs. If you use most any shoe that climbs well for other purposes, I think they will wear out quickly. Any lightweight shoe (non-boot), used as a true climbing and approach shoe, will wear out quicker than most boots. So I say the 5.10 Mountain Master.

Scot'teryx: That was me and Wopper. But the other guy and girl were not with us, we were just BSing with them on the summit. I asked you if you knew Chris Newman...right? And Wopper asked if you knew some other OSATer...right? If so that was us.... Good to see ya/meet ya!!!

Generally the "season" does not start until about mid June. So there shouldn't be that many people on the mountain. However, as VB said, "If the weather is good there will be more people. If the weather is bad there will be less people." Also the weather on Rainier at that time of year can be damn near winter conditions, especially above 10,000 feet.

Yeah, I was hoping someone that climbed the Sandy Headwall would post a report. I assume someone climbed it? I would be very interested in a TR and / or beta on the any routes on the Sandy side...anyone?

imorris: I don't mind the saddle so much. I have camped there three times and find it to be pretty much protected from the wind and flat. Great sunsets. But it is definately a high traffic area. Lots of people there and even more cutting through to get to the west side of the mountain.

I use a Blue Water ice floss on some routes 8mm x 37 Meters) and it rocks. I used it on the Ried Headwall this weekend. Certain applications, it rocks.

We summited about 12 noon.

Airmoss: I have never climbed the Leuthold. But my understanding/impression is that the Leuthold is strightforward and can be a bowling alley. I believe that the Reid is more diffcult in a couple of ways. The Reid is steeper, longer, and involves route finding. But that is just my opinion.

Wopper and I did the Reid Glacier Headwall route on Mt. Hood on Sunday (March 3, 2002). We slept at Illumination saddle on Saturday night. We had spoken with two climbers on the way up that had done the Leuthold Coulior on Sat. (cc:comer = Fairweather?). They had informed us that high winds had caused a constant barrage of crap coming down the coulior and that the Reid might be a better/safer objective. At about 3:00 a.m. a group of three Rondo skiers pased through the saddle on the way to the Leuthold. Another group had said they were going to the Yocum, but had the Leuthold as an alternative route. When we got up and ready to climb at 6:00 a.m, a party of five rolled into the saddle saying they were heading for the Leuthold. The winds seemed to have died down, but we figured on the Reid anyway, given the crowds on Leuthold. We left the sadlle at 6:30 a.m. We dropped down from the saddle onto the Reid Glacier with no problem. After traversing the Reid we turned right toward the headwall and started climbing the lower snow fan. We crossed the bergshrund to the left hand side and then enetered what I will call the left hand chute. The lower sections of the Reid are estetic and interesting, mostly just steep snow. We protected occasionally with pickets, where we figured a fall might result in a big ride. Then about half way up there were some icy sections. A screw or two here would not have been a bad idea, but were not required. Then we started to get hit by crap coming down. As it turned out, the three skiers that cut through the saddle at 3:00 a.m. had thought they were on the Leuthold, but actually were on the Reid Headwall. The skiers were understandably moving somewhat slow. There are many ways to climb the Reid Headwall. We tried to get away from the crap coming down by vearing left up a different gully. This put us on about a 10 foot section of 70-80 degree hard ice. Wopper lead it with no problems (Screw here would have been nice). The ice had good foot pockets, so even my aluminum crampons worked fine. I followed Wopper up, and wouldn't you know it, just as I was on the steep section the skiers kicked a bunch of shit down that somehow funnelled right into the gully I was in. I took afew punches with one hell of a punch in the nose. I saw stars, but held on. Once out of this gully we followed the skiers, traversing around some gendarmes/spires. This was almost exclusively on good snow. We threw in a picket here and there as a fall meant a big ride over a cliff or two. From here we could see down into the Leuthold Coulior. There were multiple parties in the coulior, but it did not look too crowded. There were no winds causing the problems of Sat. We noticed two guys coming off Yocum Ridge. The route from where we were, looked to be in about as good of shape as it gets. Good enough to know I'm not getting on it. But these guys did and we watched them top out by the top of the Leuthold Coulior. The Skiers took a break and we climbed up and around them. We finally broke at about twenty feet below the summit ridge (sub ridge) and took a much needed water break and candy bar snack. After powering up we traveresed the summit ridge to the true summit. Good conditions down hogs back. Overall impressions of the route: Both Wopper and I really enjoyed this route. It is sustained (40-50+ degrees) depending on how you do the route, mostly 50 degree stuff with some steeper sections) and not one you want to putz your way up. I would only get on this with good snow conditions and cold-ass weather. It is not an incredibly technical route, but does force you to actually climb the vast majority of the route. A fall on several sections of the route would result in a big ride if it was unprotected or not arrested. Not a beginner route, but not an expert route either. A good moderate route that climbs all the way to the summit ridge. We mostly simul-climbed and only actually set up what I would call an alpine belay twice. The route was very estetic and interesting, it could be made more difficult or more easy depending on which gullies you choose. Some route finding abilites are required. I would choose this over the Leuthold if you are looking for a slightly more diffcult and interesting route with fewer folks on it. One word of caution. This would not be a fun route to try and bail on. Sure you could do it, but it seems to me that finishing the route is easiest. Helemts are mandatory. I have no idea what the books say about this route. Smoot's book just says there are two gulleys that can freeze up but are otherwise garbage chutes.

Cotpaxi is generally referred to as the world's highest "active" valcano. How in the hell they got highest is beyond me. I am unsure if it actually is the highest active volcano, but everything I have ever seen on it, including the locals there, say it is the highest active volcano. Maybe some dolt at TNF just assumed it was one in the same?

Way to be!!! Fingers crossed...hope he has no lasting problems. [ 03-01-2002: Message edited by: Rodchester ]