The Expedition:

Q: How do you get on an expedition to climb Aconcagua?
A: Most reputable guides ask for your climbing resume and require some serious climbing experience. Ideally they want to see climbs of 14,000' mountains. Most guides emphasize conditioning since most people took the non-technical routes. I think it is very, very helpful to had been on a few 14,000 mountain before you attempt Aconcagua. It is a high-altitude mountain. Mts Rainier, Cook and Mont Blanc would be some of my suggestions to get ready for Aconcagua.

Q: Do I really need a guide for Aconcagua?
A: It all depends on your skills, money and time available. Many, many people go to Aconcagua without a formal guide and contract with local outfitters for mules or carry everything themselves. There are normally a lot of climbers on Aconcagua so you would probably not be alone but could be. But in harsh weather (white-outs) or in a medical emergency, you will be on your own so consider your skill level carefully.

Q: What is involved if I plan my own climb?
A: Basically everything: travel, hotels, food, gear, routes, communications, emergency contentions - everything. There are local outfitters who can provide some services such as getting food or heavy tents to basecamp. And some can provide a local guide at low costs. You can save a lot of money this way but as I said before, consider your skills in the event that something goes wrong - are you 100% self sufficient? What are your medical skills? HAPE and HACE are real possibilities on Aconcagua - do you have the proper medicine and training to deal with it? And a hundred more questions. See my guide page for more.

Q: Why did you choose Field Touring (FT) as a guide service?
A: I followed their Gasherbrum climbs in 2004 with the aim of joining them in 2005. But due to the unrest in that region plus some work considerations, I changed my plans to Aconcagua. Dave Hancock has run Aconcagua climbs for ten years. In 2004 they put 20 of 26 climbers on the summit. They run low cost trips and attract more independent climbers. I liked the freedom to go at my own pace yet have the basic logistical support.

Q: How did they perform?
A: Very well for this relatively simple expedition. All promises were completed. On our climb 6 of 7 clients summited. There were no serious surprises. The guides Stuart Remensynder and Martin Girodio were extremely competent, respectful and demonstrated a rare passion for getting the clients to the summit and back as safely as possible. But the real uniqueness of FT is their philosophy of not "guiding" but rather leading clients and serving as a safety net. This is a fine line in that sometimes clients want to be "told what to do" but others left alone. If the guides are on the wrong side of this line, clients feel over controlled or left out. Stu and Martin did an excellent job in this respect. An example was on summit night, a clear and windless rarity on Aconcagua, two climbers wanted to start at 1:00AM instead of the agreed upon 5:00. They were told to go ahead but turn back at the first sign of bad weather. They returned 20 minutes later as it started to drizzle. They felt empowered yet understood the safety boundaries. The base camp services were basic. The group gear (tents, etc.) and meals prepared by FT were satisfactory. The pre-trip information was slightly confusing with respect to weight allowances and amount of food we were required to bring but it all worked out.

Q: Why did you choose Mountain Professionals as a guide service for 2008?
A: I will be climbing Everest with them so I wanted to build the bonds. Plus I climbed on Broad Peak with Ryan Waters in 2006 and really enjoyed his style.

Q: How did they perform?
A: Excellent. We had no surprises. I found Ryan, Dave Elmore and Cristina Preito very professional. The had several opportunities to demonstrate their skills in handling challenging client situations. I would highly recommend them.


Q: How long did it take?
A: The entire trip took about 20 days for me. 4 days to travel to Argentina from the US including a day or so in Mendoza. Then 3 days trek to basecamp at 13,800'. After a couple days rest and getting used to the altitude at basecamp we spent the 4 days climbing between Camp 1 and Camp 2 at 19,000' on acclimatization climbs, gear carries to the camps and finally moving to Camp 1, Camp 1.5 and Camp 2. On day 17 of the expedition we summited. The return to Mendoza was a swift two days.

Q: Was there web site coverage?
A: I sent emails and digital images over a satellite telephone to Cathy post them on this site at Aconcagua Dispatches .

Q: How did the technology work out?
A: Mixed. I had a whole lot of problems getting correct information from Globalstar and PHI leasing (where I rented the sat phone) on the correct cabling. I spent over $100 on calls to the support center. One battery provided by PHI would only last for about 20 minutes of voice calls and the 220V/120V recharger was very old and the prongs broke so I could not recharge the phone. Luckily they also provided a 12 volt recharger and the Rangers at Campo Argentina were kind enough to let me use their solar system. By only using the phone for data in short bursts, I was able to send the dispatches. The PDA and camera worked fine. Also Globalstar's direct access as an ISP using #777 was fantastic. Once I had a solid signal (but it was extremely unreliable), it worked perfectly. I have used Iridium and Thurya sat systems in Asia and never, ever had this many problems. I did contact PHI after the climb and they offered apologies and a refund for my rental.

There are commercially available systems that are similar to what I used, for example from Humanedgetech.com, part of Xplorersweb. They offer turnkey systems including true real-time updates of a web page. In other words, they do not require a someone to cut and past information it goes directly to the site. They also offer excellent video capability and a new gps feature to locate your dispatch on a map. It is pricey but does a great job. I used one of their systems on Everest in 2003. It was good then and has improved. The big advantage to using this system is that it usually works off the shelf and does not require on-mountain debugging!!

The Climb

Q: Which route did you take?
A: Four of us intended to take the Polish Direct route. And the rest the False Polish or the Traverse to the Normal route. But on our summit morning as we standing about 600' above Camp 2 on the edge of the glacier putting on our crampons, harnesses and getting ready to rope up Stu and I saw a car size block of ice calve off a gap we were targeting. It followed the fall line on the glacier spawning hundreds of pieces. We took into account that the Polish Glacier was supposed to be a stable (if any glacier ever is!). However it had been quite warm the past week with bright sun and warm winds. We finally determined the risk were unnecessary and we abandoned the glacier for the traverse.

Q: How was the Traverse?
A: Other than climbing from 19,000' to almost 23,000' it was not that difficult. This year, 2005, was very dry so the only snow were a few small snowfields above Camp 2. Some teams used crampons and I saw a few short-roped but we did neither. The route was well worn and crowded. From Camp 2 at 19,000' or from Camp Colera at 20,000' (where the rest of our team started) the route has a continuous rise but not too serious. This continues for several hours until you reach the Canaleta, a 1,000 foot chute of loose rock and at a 45-degree angle. This is at 21,800' so it was getting more difficult to breath. Interestingly enough most people, including Stu and I, left our packs at the base of the Canaleta and took only cameras, water bottles (PDA and Sat phone :) ) to the summit.

Q: And the summit?
A: Seeing the famous Aconcagua cross was fantastic. The summit is about half the size of a football field. It is all rock. You can see the Pacific Ocean, the surrounding mountains and glaciers in both Argentina and Chili. There is a log book for the signatures of the summiters.

Q: How long did it take?
A: We took 14 hours since we spent almost 2 hours on our Glacier attempt. From the Polish Glacier, we took about 7 hours to reach the summit, an hour on the summit and about 4 hours back to Camp 2.

Q: What kind of weather conditions did you have?
A: We climbed in February so it was warmer than December and early January. It was very warm for the trek to basecamp. Then it gradually got colder we gained altitude. It was always windy. Some nights the wind were relentless. It was a straight-line wind, not swirling, that easily blew tents and climbers around. You had to use large rocks to keep your tent secure and leave nothing loose outside. We had no snow and a couple of nights of light rain during the walk-in.

Q: Anything different from 2005 to 2008?
A: There was more snow on the route but the weather was cold and windy as before!

Q: Did you use bottled oxygen?
A: No, supplemental oxygen is usually used above 26,500'.

Q: I read that Aconcagua is an easy climb, really just a high-altitude trek.
A: It can be "easy" on a perfect weather day and on the normal route. But report after report speaks of wind, cold, snow and fatigue due to the altitude. Remember this in almost 7,000 meters, 23,000 feet. I don't care if you are just sitting in a chair, it is harder to breath and takes a toll on your body. Many of those who do not summit underestimate this mountain. I personally saw many climbers who were out of gas. I spoke with several (young and old) who had turned around on the normal route. It is the altitude that gets to climbers. You must, must be in top aerobic conditioning otherwise this is either an impossible or miserable experience.

Q: How did Aconcagua compare with Denali or Ama Dablam?
A: It was about the same length for the climb and about the same altitude as Ama Dablam. It was more similar to Denali in that the climbing was very straightforward with no real objective danger except for the vicious weather on both mountains. Also you carry everything yourself and there is no support on the mountain from porters or Sherpas like in Nepal. However, on Denali you climb on snow from day one to the summit. Aconcagua, in 2005, was very dry and there was almost no snow ... but that changes from year to year.

Q: How does Aconcagua compare with Everest or other 8,000m peaks??
A: In all honesty, they are in a totally different league from Aconcagua. They are longer by more than twice, depending on the mountain, more technically challenging. They require significantly more logistics, gear, food and on mountain support. Your physical conditioning must be a notch higher than was required on Aconcagua. And, probably most important, your mental state must be in a different place. Aconcagua is a relatively "simple" climb in that the approach is short and easy, there are a couple of high camps, summit day can be no more than 8 hours. The 8,000 mountains take all this and amplify it greatly. If your mind is not ready for the grueling work day after day, you will not summit and will have a horrible time.

Q: Exactly where is Aconcagua?
A: Aconcagua is located in Argentina near the border with Chile. Most climbers fly into Santiago (Chile) or Mendoza (Argentina) and took a bus to Puente del Inca for the normal route or to Penitentes for the Polish Glacier, Polish Traverse and Vacas routes. It is not part of the Andes mountain range but on an adjacent range thus stands out prominently above the surrounding peaks. At 22,841 feet it is the highest mountain in South America thus one of the 7 summits, the highest peak on each of the seven continents.

Q: How many people had summited and how many people had died trying?
A: There are no central statistics but about 3,500 climbers make a summit attempt each year with an estimated 30% success rate. Since it is only 80 miles from the pacific ocean, Aconcagua gets hits with horribly high winds and storms, similar to Denali in Alaska. The wind chills can drop to 100 degrees below zero. It is the weather and altitude that makes it dangerous.