Remote Glacier trip w/ just 2 people? Y or N

[wfinley]

I have a question: would you do a remote glacier trip with only one other person? Remote meaning a 10 day fly into the Wrangells mountains. Heavily crevassed etc. etc.

 

Discuss why or why not... I'm interested in other people's opinions in regards to safe practices on glaciers.

[AlpineK]

I've been on plenty of glaciers with just 2 people. All of those glaciers have been fairly safe glaciers without crazy crevasses. There are techniques for crevass travel with only 2 people. I'd say read up on the subject and maybe do some practice with your partner first. Talk it over and figure out how comfortable you both are.

 

Can you get a third? Glacier travel in groups of 3 provides you with more options.

[wormfighter6]

How good are each of your self rescue skills, and how well versed are you at setting up a 5:1 z pully. If you are both good have good rope skills go for it. But groups of three are a lot safer.

Edited April 8, 2007 by wormfighter6

[wfinley]

We are both experienced and confident when it comes to glacier and have done numerous trips together to heavily glaciated areas in the past - including a number of trips with just the 2 of us. I'm more interested in your own opinions regarding 2 person teams and why or why you would / wouldn't do such a trip.

[Lambone]

Pulling someone out of a crevase by yourself is hard as hell. Try it, then decide for yourself.

[AlpineK]

You have to be able to tie off the rope so you can stand up and set up a pulley system if your partner can't jug the rope while you lie in self arrest.

[wfinley]

I am totally familiar with how glacier travel / crevasse rescue works; this wasn't meant to be a n00b question; thus I'll rephrase:

 

It is obvious that a 3 person glacier travel is much safer; however if you and your partner were confident in self rescue technique would you go on a remote expedition where you'd be on glaciers the entire time? In other words; do you think 2 person glacier teams are safe?

 

 

[chris]

I've done it twice in the St. Elias.

 

All this talk about crevasse rescue and hard it is made me think about the AMGA exam test.

 

With the following equipment:

1. A partner with a harness, two locking carabiners

2. A rope to connect you

3. Cordellette, slings, and prussik cords (not to exceed a total of six, and no more than two cordellettes)

4. One ice axe

5. A picket or a second ice axe

6. Three locking carabiners

7. Five non-locking carabiners

8. A backpack

See if you can do this in under 45 minutes:

1. Arrest a fall (have your partner sit on the edge of a crevasse and slide in, without excessive slack or tension in the rope).

2. Build an anchor

3. Rappel to your partner, and put them in an improvised chest harness

4. Ascend back out

5. Build a haul system greater than 4:1

6. Scenario is finished when your partner is on the surface

**If you try this out, have a back-up anchor pre-built, with a seperate line, for the "victim" to be tied to.

Some rules:

1. The rescuer must be anchored in some way when closer than 2 meters to the lip of the crevasse

2. The haul system either must be self-tending or tended at all times

3. The tail end of the rope must be tied either to the rescuer or the anchor at all times.

 

That's the AMGA crevasse rescue test conducted on every Alpine Guide Exam.

[slogon]

I definitely like three minimum, but lots of others more experienced go with two and most probably safely. Even if I was confident I could get the other guy out, I'd sure like two above if I was in the hole and couldn't get out for some reason (probably not applicable, but the Wickwire story in Alaska comes to mind). Just my 2 cents.

[MisterMo]

You may already be familiar with the following, but in addition to the Wickwire/Kerrebrock incident a look at Roberts' book on his two man trip to Deborah will provide ample examples of just how horribly wrong two man glacier travel can go.

 

Then theres all the two person parties who have no incidents at all.

 

Once familiar with that it becomes really "just" another objective hazard decision...something you can only prepare for or prevent to a limited extent....e.g. what sort of risk are you prepared to take against a hazard that you cannot control.

 

So, my short answer to your question would be maybe, depending on the partner, the specific trip, and the season.

[Lambone]

I am totally familiar with how glacier travel / crevasse rescue works; this wasn't meant to be a n00b question; thus I'll rephrase:

 

It is obvious that a 3 person glacier travel is much safer; however if you and your partner were confident in self rescue technique would you go on a remote expedition where you'd be on glaciers the entire time? In other words; do you think 2 person glacier teams are safe?

 

 

dude, it is still a stupid question. no offense...

 

no, it is plainly not AS safe, but safety is all realative, as well as "remoteness."

[wfinley]

Lambone, I take it you've never climbed on a glacier as part of a two man team; how do you access alpine routes or do you always climb as a team of 3? Likewise I'm not too interested in what Roberts had to say; if I took lessons from Roberts I would too scared to use rap anchors.

 

The question had to do with comfort level; and it's not a stupid question as many people venture into the mountains as teams of two all the time.

[Doug]

You get what you ask for on this board, don't you? Is your reason for wanting to go as a duo based on not wanting the additional dynamics of a third? Personally, I would go with three, but that is because to me it mitigates the risk in a heavily crevassed area. Two people can normally travel faster and more efficiently than two, but on a 10 day trip, it may be more efficient to go with three. It really is up to your comfort level. I don't know what your level of cceptable risk is; but mine tells me to go with three. Best of luck, and I'd sure like to see a TR!

[Bergretter]

You know, I was asking this same question, is it safe for two? I found some good answers in the Mountaineers book titled Alpine Climbing: Techniques to Take You Higher. Mark and Kathy discuss in detail the pros and cons of glacier travel for two and detailed techniques for a crevasse rescue with only one partner. Read what they have to say and decide for yourself the answer to your question.

[cj001f]

Lambone, I take it you've never climbed on a glacier as part of a two man team

 

I'm guessing he's of the opinion that the answer for someone asking on a messageboard is "no"

[genepires]

Some food for thought.

 

A senior guide for a well respected guide service locally was scouting out a new area in the talkeetna range for a guiding instructional area. He was with another talkeetna local and no one else. He approached a large open crevasse perpendicularly to check it out. What he didn't know was that he was on a covered crevasse that ran perpendicular to the open one. He punched through and cut through the bridge some 30 feet. When his buddy, who was well versed in single person rescue, went to dig a t-slot from his self arrest position, he punched a hole through, but luckily did not fall in. He was stuck in place and would have stayed there till he also eventually fell in. Luckilly, the senior guide was able to get an ice screw in to take the weight while his buddy crawled to safer ground to make a solid anchor. If he was unable to make it to a wall, they would have been killed.

 

 

Experience and skills, while very important, can only go so far. There can be a situation, where with all the knowledge and skills, will do you no good and you would be dead unless you have a team of three. AND even then, it may do no good. (case in point, 3 canadian climbers all fall into the same crevasse on baker n side some 5 years ago)

 

to answer your question "In other words; do you think 2 person glacier teams are safe? "

 

I would say that if you are doing a remote and totally glacier travel oreinted trip, then 3 is a minimum. If you are having a trip where the glacier travel portion is a small fraction of the trip, then 2 is fine.(like appraoching technical climbs) It is all a matter of probability, the amount of time spent on the glacier. The longer you are exposed to the hazard, the more important it is to be a team of 3. The turning point between 2 and 3 is personal relative number. Any more than 4 hours seems like a glacier travel trip and would require 3 people. I don't think any technical cascade mountain route would need more than 1 hour, but alaska?

[AlpineK]

Good post.

 

All I can say is I've done a ton of 2 party groups in the Cascades and a number in the Canadian Rockies. In Alaska the only major climb we did was as a group of 3. We crossed some of the biggest crevasses I've seen anywhere.

 

I don't think you're going to get a yes or no answer here. Talk it over with your friend, look at some pictures of the route, and decide if you both feel comfortable.

[chris]

Everyone's arguments against 2-person teams are honest. Good posts.

 

For me, I've traveled for extended periods of time, as part of a 2 man team on 5 trips to Alaska and several more in Antarctica. I'll do it again soon. I believe it can be managed to an acceptable level of risk.

 

I second an earlier post to read the relevant sections of Houston & Cosley's book, and then decide for yourselves.

[wfinley]

Thanks for all the responses; especially to genepires and mtnfreak. In general I should know better than post a question that essentially depends on one's own perception of risk and comfort level (I might as well have asked 'would you solo this').

 

Here is my $.02: I rarely am part of a 3 person team (personally I find it cumbersome for skiing) but try to get out with 2 teams of 2. Likewise I have done numerous trips as just a 2 member team. Conventional wisdom states that you should be part of a (minimum) 3 person team; then again conventional wisdom states that you should be home watching football on your HDTV.

 

Here's another question along these same lines: if you were a team of 4 would you travel as 2 teams of 2 - or 1 team of 4 (on a moderate glacial route)?

 

 

 

[Dechristo]

you could wear a section of extension ladder

[wfinley]

you could wear a section of extension ladder

This illustration is from a 1984 story in the Mountaineering Club of Alaska newsletter by Dave Johnston. This was the setup he did for a solo winter ascent of Sanford.

[catbirdseat]

Thanks for all the responses; especially to genepires and mtnfreak. In general I should know better than post a question that essentially depends on one's own perception of risk and comfort level (I might as well have asked 'would you solo this').

 

Here is my $.02: I rarely am part of a 3 person team (personally I find it cumbersome for skiing) but try to get out with 2 teams of 2. Likewise I have done numerous trips as just a 2 member team. Conventional wisdom states that you should be part of a (minimum) 3 person team; then again conventional wisdom states that you should be home watching football on your HDTV.

 

Here's another question along these same lines: if you were a team of 4 would you travel as 2 teams of 2 - or 1 team of 4 (on a moderate glacial route)?

 

 

I suppose that if I needed two ropes for part of the climb, I'd go with two teams of two, otherwise one team of four. If the climb was just Rainier for example, the answer would be one.

[mtn_mouse]

I was leading a rope of 2 and just about at the summit of Rainier, when the dumbshit behind me fell off a snow bridge into a deep crevasse. What had been up to then a pleasant climb, then became a very serious and difficult matter as I was dragged a bit before being able to stop, with a partner dangling in the void. So ever since that incident, I really prefer 3 on a rope on a glacier. Do I always travel with 3? Of course not, I am willing to take risk, and sometimes all I can find is 1 partner. So there is no real answer to your question, as we all take risks, but as I am sure you know, 3 is the safest way to go, and you won't regret adding that third person.

 

[montypiton]

Reading the responses to your initial query, and your responses to those, I get a sense that this question might really be about safe group size for the remoteness of your planned project, rather than simply glacier safety. I say this, because in your posts you offer that you and your partner are well-skilled and experienced in glacier travel. So I might offer a different perspective from other respondents. As background, I'll admit to having soloed the easiest routes on both Denali and Aconcagua, and done numerous remote trips ranging from solo excursions to expeditionary ventures with groups of 12 or more. Based on my experience, I suggest that safety is more a product of your experience, expertise, and the interpersonal dynamics of the group you're traveling with. A group of 12 inexperienced, ignorant, or incompatible companions will most likely be less safe than a fit, experienced, expert solo adventurer. If you and your partner are well-versed in glacier travel/rescue, and are comfortable enough with one another to be considering a trip of this length and remoteness, adding a third, unless you know that third to be your equal in skill and experience and compatibility, is as likely to make your group less safe, as more safe. Where you're headed, there are crevasses that would swallow twenty as easily as two...