> Ethan Guo was hoping to become the youngest person to fly solo to all seven continents
I think a more favorable title is "US pilot stranded in Antarctica after landing plane without permission". They chose the word "influencer" for a reason, even though it was a pilot trying to set a record that happened to film himself. He's even flying to raise funds for cancer research.
Too bad he lied to ground control, what a great way to lose your license, prison aside.
edit: to answer some of the replies, I'm just concerned with the implicit patronization that media applies to anyone who has a hobby/career but also makes money off of publicizing it.
> He's even flying to raise funds for cancer research.
The best line from the Lorax film is in this song where he’s trying to put a positive spin on his aggressive commercialization and they say “a portion of proceeds goes to charity”!
I concur with the consequences and the perverse incentives involved, but this goes with the general advice of "If you're going to break the law, either do so extremely publicly or extremely privately."
The really sad thing here is I have little doubt this could've been arranged legally given the respective parties and interests involved, but Mr. Guo chose to be selfish and foolhardy by not abiding by anyone else's timeline or interests. He deserves all the punishment and derision coming his way.
This incident reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathias_Rust and his landing in Red Square. A risky thing to do at a time when air defences were very much live, and also incredibly risky to land in a public square, but he made it and only spent a few months in prison.
Thousands of people have pursued their dreams or goals while doing-it-to-raise-funds-for-good-cause. I don’t really get it... people can just do whatever and put an Other People Are Helping Cure Cancer sticker on it. Like, what? What does this stunt have to do with cancer?
What differentiates a person who’s doing a stunt to raise money for a charitable cause and a person who is “using sick kids as cover” for their behavior?
> What differentiates a person who’s doing a stunt to raise money for a charitable cause and a person who is “using sick kids as cover” for their behavior?
One, coördination. Did the charity know about this fundraiser?
Two, long-term orientation. Is this a one-off to gain followers? Or is he consistently giving to charity?
Three, outcome. How much did he raise and donate?
None of these bear favourably for this kid. He’s an influencer. It’s nice he’s making people think about charity. But he’s not showing any signs of giving a shit about the effects of his actions.
Surely you can do all of those things and still be a machiavellian psychopath?
Or be too lazy to do those things and still have altruistic intentions?
Couldn’t someone have both selfish and altruistic intentions simultaneously?
My point being, it’s hard to know the truth but easy to assume the worst about someone. Maybe I don’t have enough context to know otherwise, but I don’t see a reason to jump to the conclusion this kid is a psychopath
It is easy: he is a proven liar who is ready to endanger other people. He lied about his flight plan and imposed himself to a remote base in one of the most inhospitable regions of Earth. Had anything happened to him, rescuers would have had to risk their lives; he got lucky but right now, he is eating into the base's reserves of food, water, energy and fuel.
I can guarantee you 100% he doesn't care for a second about sick kids, the same way he doesn't care for a second about the people on the base.
Avweb [0] has a bit more concise report of the story:
>On June 28, Chilean prosecutors allege that Guo submitted a false flight plan at Carlos Ibáñez del Campo Airport in Punta Arenas, indicating he would fly over the city. However, authorities claim he deviated from this plan without notification, continuing toward Antarctica and landing at Lieutenant Rodolfo Marsh Base in Chilean Antarctic territory.
>Prosecutors allege that Guo violated “multiple national and international regulations” by altering his flight path without prior approval and touching down on a portion of Antarctica claimed by Chile.
Also, this is a 675 nm (1250 km) trip, with 529 nm (980 km) over open ocean during the southern winter. [1] Still within range of a 182, but yikes.
> Chile are agreeing to letting him leave, provided he donates $30k to charity
“The prosecutor’s office said Guo must also pay all costs for his ‘aircraft security and personal maintenance’ during his stay at the military facility. He also needs to cover all expenses for his return.” So possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars more.
There is also a good chance the FAA revokes his pilot’s license.
It's kind of weird that even though air and flying is associated with ultimate dreamlike freedom it is regulated so stringently even in places where there are basically no humans, no infrastructure, barely even any nature to protect
There's a lot of nature to protect in Antarctica, and there are very strict rules. This guy is selfishly flaunting those rules and just paying to get rid of the consequences. Considering he's got a personal plane and pilot's license at 19 he obviously has rich parents who can buy his way out of trouble.
Donating to charity is not impressive if you're still rich after you donate. Me giving $20 to a homeless person is a bigger blow to my personal wellbeing than this guy's "donation".
> There's a lot of nature to protect in Antarctica
I'm sure the entire Chilean military base with all the fuel they burn there and garbage they produce is built there specifically to protect Antarctic nature from occasional idiots in small planes.
He obviously can afford it, like the Chilean government could afford to put unnecessary military base there. Somehow when some government is stupidly splurging it's good and fine because they do it in accordance with rules, that they written themselves.
> I'm sure the entire Chilean military base with all the fuel they burn there and garbage they produce is built there specifically to protect Antarctic nature from occasional idiots in small planes.
Its mostly there because it includes Chile’s main scientific/meteorological research station in Antarctica and the airfield providing for personnel and supply transport for both that station and the nearby stations of other countries.
Because its largely a scientific/meteorological research station and an airport serving that station and the many others of different countries on King George Island, and because nothing in the Protocol prohibits it?
Chile has a right to regulate their territorial waters and sky however they see fit. Just because he has a PPL from the US it doesn't give him the right to totally ignore the regulations in a foreign country. Part of international travel is being respectful to the places that you're traveling through, like knowing their laws and customs and not assuming that you can just do whatever you want there because you've got a flight back in a few days.
To be fair in Antarctica territorial ownership is a bit strange, as I understand it a lot of countries don't recognise Antarctic claims in general and those that do tend to do so on a mutual basis. The British, Chilean, and Argentine claims considerably overlap as well which further complicates the matter.
Filing false flight plans and make unapproved landings at military-operated bases in territory with conflicting claims of three different countries is, in general, even dumber than doing it in territory claimed by only one country.
Because I read too many comments here, by people super seriously invested in some teenager obeying some arbitrary rules far away, over vast swaths of water, both liquid and solid.
And it seriously irked me. I know rules are there for a reason. Some are even good and make cooperation between people easier. But when rare edge case happens I hate that the first instinct of random people is to ponder how the rules, established by wealthy and powerful, should be applied with maximum severity to inflict maximum damage on the stupid kid that wanted to stand out. And all this while established international rules regarding war crimes are violated daily. And the criminal suffers no punishment, barely any inconvenience and gets to have a meeting with US president in Alaska, who himself is also a criminal, just not of the war flavor, yet, probably.
Exactly. I have lost all ability to care when people complain about petty things like how outrageous it is to dare to land on a slab of ice and rock but at the same time not do anything about multiple active genocides. I just focus on my friends, family, and community and have lost all ability to care about these broader questions.
> how outrageous it is to dare to land on a slab of ice and rock
The particular “slab of ice and rock” that he landed on without permission after filing a false flight plan appears to be (while the story mentions only that it is a military base) a public airport operated by the Chilean air force, and the only airport on King George Island. (The name the article uses for the base is actually the name of the airport that is part of the base, the base has a different name.)
There's kind of a good reason for them to be touchy about people not following protocol with things like flight plans and landing permissions.
Don't call him a stupid kid. He represents everything I believe in as a hacker. He's smart, beautiful, talented, and wants to live life pulling off cool stunts that inspire the rest of us, with or without permission. Silly rules aren't meant for people like him. It's a travesty that a hacker forum would hate hackers so much and cheer on a scheming third world government stamping out his dream. A good, wise, enlightened government would try to cultivate this kind of curiosity and spunk, rather than seeing it as an opportunity to inflict pain and bleed someone for a small amount of money. When I grew up in America, the movies idolized people like him, and that's one of the reasons America has been so successful. I hope he isn't so traumatized by this unfair abuse that he never wants to be audacious again.
It really is a pathetic "hacker" move if the plan was "Let's just flaunt the rules, land in 'hostile' territory and hope the punishment isn't so severe.". So far his talent is operating a plane, lots of people can do that.
An actual hacker would figure out something clever to not be caught, be arrested/detained for several weeks (de facto if not de jure), and relying on daddy's dollars to bail him out...
It is often easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission. Flaunting the rules was probably his only option for getting into Antarctica. I imagine for many hackers in the past, their best hope of getting to play with a serious computer was to hack into one. The motivation is what matters. If your goal is to do crime and profit, then yes, not getting caught is very important. But if your goal is curiosity or to tell a compelling story to your followers about how you did something no one's ever done before, then that comes from a pure innocent heart. Such a person is unlikely to have spent much time in their life developing the skills needed to not get caught. So I wouldn't hold that against them. It's on the system to forgive such persons. If what they did was actually cool and prosocial, then they shouldn't be punished for breaking the rules to do it.
Cocoons didn't work on January 29th this year. Thank God, no teenager was trying to achieve anything there. Just boring adults doing boring jobs as per rules and regulations.
He flew from one airport to another airport without permission of the local bureaucracies? I mean you get fined for breaking the rules but it doesn't seem that insane.
Filing a false flight plan and landing at a South American military base in Antarctica in a completely inadequate plane, without authorization, is a bold move.
Reminds me of that guy[1][2] a few years ago who jumped out of his running airplane deliberately staging its crash. I guess I just don't understand the YouTube economy. How are these stunts cost effective? This probably means no more flying ever for both of these "influencer" guys. So, what's their plan after they get caught and lose their license and/or do time in prison?
I think the question is how one recoups the cost of crashing a plane. I know youtubers who make 5 to 6 figures, but they have to keep posting content that gets watched. One "crash my plane" video doesn't seem like a big money maker.
> touching down on a portion of Antarctica claimed by Chile
It is worth pointing out that no other nation acknowledges Chile's claim to this part of Antarctica. And in fact, several other countries claim the same territory.
It doesn't make landing there a good idea, but it's not really an invasion of sovereign Chilean territory in a sane way. Chile claims an enormous portion of Antarctica which they exert absolutely 0 sovereignty over in practice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Antarctic_Territory. In fact, two of the three US antarctic bases (Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station and Palmer station) are in their claimed territory, and I can assure you that US researchers do not ask Chile's permission to enter and leave.
You can call this a dumb stunt without giving credence to the goofy south american land claims Chile and Argentina are prone to making.
He landed near/at a Chile's base and is in Chile's custody. For purposes of this the claim is valid since Chile is able to enforce it and nobody else will oppose them doing so.
In general you are correct the claim isn't recognized, but it doesn't apply here.
He overflew Chile proper on his way into their territorial claims. So call it what you will but he filed a false flight plan with their regulatory body and he should face some consequences for it. The fact that his destination is in disputed territory doesn't mitigate any of that. The Chilean military and civilian bodies are being very lenient.
But seeing teenagers do not think, I believe the court made the correct decision. Hopefully he can meet the court's requirements and is able to leave safely.
Entitled US influencer also learns that is it not a good idea flying to Antarctica in the middle of winter. Glad he didn't endanger anybody else, that is also a miracle.
Or he shouldn't have changed his flight plan without letting the ATC know, these things cause massive headaches for everyone else. ATC can't have regular service running when there's a rogue flight in the air.
He's lucky he is getting off with a slap on the wrist basically. The entitlement some people have is bewildering.
There are many ways to get approval for a flight to the Antarctic. Do it the right way.
Searching for his name shows he's been there since June, and that his original flight plan was just to fly over Puntas Arenas, which is about 1240 km away from the airbase he ended up at.
I wish there's a way to punish lawyers (and defendants) who deliberately lie.
There are several ways to respond. They include I don't have a working radio but I need to land now. Control towers know these procedures exist and will look them up when needed (they are used so rarely that nobody remembers them). So long as you are acting like a pilot who in an emergency you will be fine in general. (of course if you are acting like an emergency in a way that would allow you to pull a 9-11 attack on something important they will shoot, but it isn't the default).
"Stranded" implies he is physically stuck, but the article contradicts itself on several points.
> "I remain in Antarctica awaiting approval for my departure flight"
> He was not forced to stay there, only to remain in Chilean territory
> He must also leave the country as soon as conditions allow
> Guo’s plane “does not have the capabilities to make a flight”
As a reader, it's hard to understand exactly what is happening. This is very poor reporting.
The most interesting detail in buried in the last paragraph:
> The prosecutor’s office said Guo must also pay all costs for his “aircraft security and personal maintenance” during his stay at the military facility. He also needs to cover all expenses for his return.
> Guo’s plane “does not have the capabilities to make a flight”
> The prosecutor’s office said Guo must also pay all costs for his “aircraft security and personal maintenance” during his stay at the military facility. He also needs to cover all expenses for his return.
They may be unwilling or unable to sell him 60 gallons of 100LL avgas. It's not like he's just pulling up to the FBO at a local airstrip. There are thousands of locations across the country and across the world where aviators can just land, taxi to a tiedown and fuel up, and take off...the Chilean military base in Antarctica is not one of those places.
Do you think the base has some outdoor tiedown locations in the Antarctic winter, or keeps hangar space available for recreational pilots? Are they going to requisition fuel from the mainland, or dip into their supplies? They may be looking at the weather and saying that he can't take off without deicing and engine temp control provisions that his Cessna 182 does not have. He needs to fly some 800 miles in an aircraft with about 1000 miles of range into Antarctic winter weather, he only has a few hours of daylight per day which may not be enough to fly VFR from Antarctica to Chile, depending on the winds through the notorious Drake Passage.
From the perspective of the base commander, there's a very young man (almost still a child) who is asking to buy the military's fuel as if it were for sale and asking him to change flight schedules and get permission from the tower to unwisely take off and put himself into a potentially lethal situation. The commander has probably refused the same requests from trainees with inadequate hours or certifications, or whose aircraft were not rated for the weather at the moment, and has managed to keep hundreds of his charges alive in a very hostile environment. "Teenager stranded at base" is not a headline he wants to publish, but "Teenager lost in Drake Passage after receiving fuel and takeoff clearance at base" is far, far worse.
"only difference" and the quotes around "due process" are doing a lot of very heavy lifting there, trying to falsely equate due process and extortion
The entire point of Due Process is that it is NOT extortion. It is entirely designed to gather and weigh the facts, with respect to impartial laws created to maintain society.
While due process may fall short of those goals in some jurisdictions, acting like it is the literal same as extortion works only to further degrade society. You really do NOT want to live in a society with only extortion by local warlords, being themselves extorted by regional warlords, etc...
Plea bargains are legal extortion. Nothing else. Pay us and we won't try to make your life living hell. There's no justice in that and it's a shameful practice of any legal system that allows it.
Call a plea bargain a distortion or corruption of due process, but even with plea bargains, due process is far less bad than extortion.
Plea bargains, within limits and when not abused are also sensible for both sides. An accused who is guilty can benefit from a years-lighter sentence by saving the prosecutor's office thousands of hours of work by taking a bargain. Or, they can always decline the bargain, go to trial, and potentially walk away acquitted, or be subject to the full legal penalty if convicted.
Where plea bargains go horribly wrong is when used against the innocent as a means of coercion to extract a conviction, and yes, that is extortion-like and a corruption of due process.
> Plea bargains, within limits and when not abused are also sensible for both sides.
I disagree completely. The purpose of a just court is to establish what happened and administer appropriate punishment regardless of what either side thinks or what is convenient for them. Without this basic honesty the whole system is a mockery.
one time I was forming a business in a state, in person. The price was $70 now, and I wanted to speed that up, as I was pulling out my kickback funds, they said I could do expedited processing for $200. The state actually codified expedited processing for $200 in a prescribed legislative process.
the only difference between the categorization of this transaction was due process.
Got it. So in your world, everything where you don't get the best service for the cheapest price is extortion because you think you are entitled to that.
Paying extra for expedited service is standard almost everywhere. Next you'll be telling us FedEx is extortionist because they charge 5X to deliver a package before 10AM tomorrow instead of before 8PM three days from now. "They're still just putting the box on a plane and truck and dropping it off...". And because UPS and USPS also charge more for faster service, they are a colluding cartel extorting everyone, along with your states' Business Bureau (or whatever it's called), and the US Passport service which also charges iirc $150 extra for an expedited passport.
Due Process is not extortion because 1) it is a standard process based on fairness to arrive at the cost or penalty, and 2) it is THE SAME for everyone. The legislature decided on a process, presumably with input from their bureaus that it required X extra work to expedite, and came up with $200.
If it was extortion, it would be the worker at the desk saying" I'm the only one on duty today, and you need it today, pay me (sticks finger in wind) $450 for expedited service".
Learn the actual meanings of concepts before you use them
Sheesh
He lied about his flight plan, didn't ask for authorization to land on a remote military base, endangered himself and others, all this for personal aggrandizement (and he is using kids with cancer to cover for his ego trip)
He is very much stranded, as a civilian on a military base, they are just chucking all procedure and rules out, he does not officialy exist, but gets fed and a bed, and razzed and razzed and razzed, sounds like he held up, though it will likely be impossible for him to fly out as it would need special attention to get the plane running if it was left to freeze solid, and departure clearance will have to come from the minister in charge and then he could end up waiting for 6 months for good weather.....
guy did a polar circumnavigation in a RV kitplane,
very serious extended range
I'd have massive schadenfreude if red tape prevents him from leaving on his plane. "You need fuel? Oh we have plenty here, but as military we can't just give you fuel, your government needs to buy it from our government who'll talk down the chain of command to us.".
"You want to fly? Your violation of the airspace laws means you're not allowed to use Chilean airspace anymore... sorry Gringo."
> Ethan Guo was hoping to become the youngest person to fly solo to all seven continents
I think a more favorable title is "US pilot stranded in Antarctica after landing plane without permission". They chose the word "influencer" for a reason, even though it was a pilot trying to set a record that happened to film himself. He's even flying to raise funds for cancer research.
Too bad he lied to ground control, what a great way to lose your license, prison aside.
edit: to answer some of the replies, I'm just concerned with the implicit patronization that media applies to anyone who has a hobby/career but also makes money off of publicizing it.
> They chose the word "influencer" for a reason
And that reason is his 600K followers on TikTok.
Which could describe tens of thousands of people posting to tiktok. I know someone who got to half a million without even trying.
> Which could describe tens of thousands of people posting to tiktok
The relevant nexus is influencer status and doing something dangerous and stupid. At the very least, he will lose his ability to fly.
> He's even flying to raise funds for cancer research.
The best line from the Lorax film is in this song where he’s trying to put a positive spin on his aggressive commercialization and they say “a portion of proceeds goes to charity”!
You might enjoy this classic: https://youtu.be/kTdScE3Rqh8
>> “a portion of proceeds goes to charity”!
Right! How much does this world tour cost vs how much he brings in vs how much goes to cancer research?
What does it matter, if the proceeds would never have been generated in the first place without the adventure?
if a guy makes a million dollars doing something shitty for himself and donates a thousand to charity it shouldn’t cancel out
I concur with the consequences and the perverse incentives involved, but this goes with the general advice of "If you're going to break the law, either do so extremely publicly or extremely privately."
The really sad thing here is I have little doubt this could've been arranged legally given the respective parties and interests involved, but Mr. Guo chose to be selfish and foolhardy by not abiding by anyone else's timeline or interests. He deserves all the punishment and derision coming his way.
This incident reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathias_Rust and his landing in Red Square. A risky thing to do at a time when air defences were very much live, and also incredibly risky to land in a public square, but he made it and only spent a few months in prison.
Thousands of people have pursued their dreams or goals while doing-it-to-raise-funds-for-good-cause. I don’t really get it... people can just do whatever and put an Other People Are Helping Cure Cancer sticker on it. Like, what? What does this stunt have to do with cancer?
He is an influencer and a pilot. Both things are relevant to the story.
And yet the headline cherry-picked one of them.
The "is a pilot" part can reasonably be inferred from "after landing plane". It doesn't need to be stated explicitly.
We can dispense with the rhetoric, it's very obvious that the headline was chosen to elicit a specific reaction and frame the story in a specific way.
because thats exactly what he is?
>He's even flying to raise funds for cancer research.
He is even using sick kids as a cover for his behavior.
Honestly if he isn't a manipulative psychopath, he is well on his way to become one.
What differentiates a person who’s doing a stunt to raise money for a charitable cause and a person who is “using sick kids as cover” for their behavior?
> What differentiates a person who’s doing a stunt to raise money for a charitable cause and a person who is “using sick kids as cover” for their behavior?
One, coördination. Did the charity know about this fundraiser?
Two, long-term orientation. Is this a one-off to gain followers? Or is he consistently giving to charity?
Three, outcome. How much did he raise and donate?
None of these bear favourably for this kid. He’s an influencer. It’s nice he’s making people think about charity. But he’s not showing any signs of giving a shit about the effects of his actions.
Surely you can do all of those things and still be a machiavellian psychopath?
Or be too lazy to do those things and still have altruistic intentions?
Couldn’t someone have both selfish and altruistic intentions simultaneously?
My point being, it’s hard to know the truth but easy to assume the worst about someone. Maybe I don’t have enough context to know otherwise, but I don’t see a reason to jump to the conclusion this kid is a psychopath
> it’s hard to know the truth but easy to assume the worst about someone
He’s a stupid kid. He should continue to be allowed to be a stupid kid. He just shouldn’t be allowed to fly a plane while being this stupid.
It is easy: he is a proven liar who is ready to endanger other people. He lied about his flight plan and imposed himself to a remote base in one of the most inhospitable regions of Earth. Had anything happened to him, rescuers would have had to risk their lives; he got lucky but right now, he is eating into the base's reserves of food, water, energy and fuel.
I can guarantee you 100% he doesn't care for a second about sick kids, the same way he doesn't care for a second about the people on the base.
Only God and the person in question knows.
They probably left him no choice but to lie.
They're not a very good government.
> They probably left him no choice but to lie
Since the whole flight was a choice, he obviously had the choice not to lie.
Avweb [0] has a bit more concise report of the story:
>On June 28, Chilean prosecutors allege that Guo submitted a false flight plan at Carlos Ibáñez del Campo Airport in Punta Arenas, indicating he would fly over the city. However, authorities claim he deviated from this plan without notification, continuing toward Antarctica and landing at Lieutenant Rodolfo Marsh Base in Chilean Antarctic territory.
>Prosecutors allege that Guo violated “multiple national and international regulations” by altering his flight path without prior approval and touching down on a portion of Antarctica claimed by Chile.
Also, this is a 675 nm (1250 km) trip, with 529 nm (980 km) over open ocean during the southern winter. [1] Still within range of a 182, but yikes.
[0]https://avweb.com/aviation-news/teen-pilot-detained-in-antar...
[1]https://skyvector.com/?ll=-62.19079798502279,-58.98632811745...
Doing this in a single-engine Cessna was gutsy.
My question for people who know about this stuff: how hard would it have been to get permission to land in Antarctica?
So, the critical update here is that Chile are agreeing to letting him leave, provided he donates $30k to charity.
That is extremely generous of them, considering what appears to have been the insanity of his stunt.
> Chile are agreeing to letting him leave, provided he donates $30k to charity
“The prosecutor’s office said Guo must also pay all costs for his ‘aircraft security and personal maintenance’ during his stay at the military facility. He also needs to cover all expenses for his return.” So possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars more.
There is also a good chance the FAA revokes his pilot’s license.
It's kind of weird that even though air and flying is associated with ultimate dreamlike freedom it is regulated so stringently even in places where there are basically no humans, no infrastructure, barely even any nature to protect
There's a lot of nature to protect in Antarctica, and there are very strict rules. This guy is selfishly flaunting those rules and just paying to get rid of the consequences. Considering he's got a personal plane and pilot's license at 19 he obviously has rich parents who can buy his way out of trouble.
Donating to charity is not impressive if you're still rich after you donate. Me giving $20 to a homeless person is a bigger blow to my personal wellbeing than this guy's "donation".
> This guy is selfishly flaunting those rules and just paying to get rid of the consequences.
Heads up: You probably mean he is "flouting" those rules, not "flaunting." Different word.
> This guy is selfishly flaunting those rules
“flouting” the rules actually.
Loosely:
Flaunting: ostentatiously displaying
Flouting: ostentatiously defying
> There's a lot of nature to protect in Antarctica
I'm sure the entire Chilean military base with all the fuel they burn there and garbage they produce is built there specifically to protect Antarctic nature from occasional idiots in small planes.
He obviously can afford it, like the Chilean government could afford to put unnecessary military base there. Somehow when some government is stupidly splurging it's good and fine because they do it in accordance with rules, that they written themselves.
> I'm sure the entire Chilean military base with all the fuel they burn there and garbage they produce is built there specifically to protect Antarctic nature from occasional idiots in small planes.
Its mostly there because it includes Chile’s main scientific/meteorological research station in Antarctica and the airfield providing for personnel and supply transport for both that station and the nearby stations of other countries.
Do you always talk out of your ass, Scott?
In regards to "rules they wrote themselves": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_on_Environmental_Prot...
And which point of the protocol allows Chile to build a military base there?
The base was established in 1969, the protocol was signed in 1991 and entered into force in 1998.
So why is it still there? They should pack up theirs stuff and go back home in 1998 at the latest.
Because its largely a scientific/meteorological research station and an airport serving that station and the many others of different countries on King George Island, and because nothing in the Protocol prohibits it?
Does the relative impact on the donator in some way change how much $20 is worth to the recipient?
Chile has a right to regulate their territorial waters and sky however they see fit. Just because he has a PPL from the US it doesn't give him the right to totally ignore the regulations in a foreign country. Part of international travel is being respectful to the places that you're traveling through, like knowing their laws and customs and not assuming that you can just do whatever you want there because you've got a flight back in a few days.
To be fair in Antarctica territorial ownership is a bit strange, as I understand it a lot of countries don't recognise Antarctic claims in general and those that do tend to do so on a mutual basis. The British, Chilean, and Argentine claims considerably overlap as well which further complicates the matter.
Filing false flight plans and make unapproved landings at military-operated bases in territory with conflicting claims of three different countries is, in general, even dumber than doing it in territory claimed by only one country.
Nobody recognizes their right to that part of Antarctic. The only right they have is (local and limited) might.
Why are you so personally invested in this?
Because I read too many comments here, by people super seriously invested in some teenager obeying some arbitrary rules far away, over vast swaths of water, both liquid and solid.
And it seriously irked me. I know rules are there for a reason. Some are even good and make cooperation between people easier. But when rare edge case happens I hate that the first instinct of random people is to ponder how the rules, established by wealthy and powerful, should be applied with maximum severity to inflict maximum damage on the stupid kid that wanted to stand out. And all this while established international rules regarding war crimes are violated daily. And the criminal suffers no punishment, barely any inconvenience and gets to have a meeting with US president in Alaska, who himself is also a criminal, just not of the war flavor, yet, probably.
There was this guy a while back: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathias_Rust
Young people want to do daring things. Don't crucify them in your minds on behalf of powerful, rich, old farts when they try, if noone got hurt.
Exactly. I have lost all ability to care when people complain about petty things like how outrageous it is to dare to land on a slab of ice and rock but at the same time not do anything about multiple active genocides. I just focus on my friends, family, and community and have lost all ability to care about these broader questions.
> how outrageous it is to dare to land on a slab of ice and rock
The particular “slab of ice and rock” that he landed on without permission after filing a false flight plan appears to be (while the story mentions only that it is a military base) a public airport operated by the Chilean air force, and the only airport on King George Island. (The name the article uses for the base is actually the name of the airport that is part of the base, the base has a different name.)
There's kind of a good reason for them to be touchy about people not following protocol with things like flight plans and landing permissions.
That makes way more sense.
Don't call him a stupid kid. He represents everything I believe in as a hacker. He's smart, beautiful, talented, and wants to live life pulling off cool stunts that inspire the rest of us, with or without permission. Silly rules aren't meant for people like him. It's a travesty that a hacker forum would hate hackers so much and cheer on a scheming third world government stamping out his dream. A good, wise, enlightened government would try to cultivate this kind of curiosity and spunk, rather than seeing it as an opportunity to inflict pain and bleed someone for a small amount of money. When I grew up in America, the movies idolized people like him, and that's one of the reasons America has been so successful. I hope he isn't so traumatized by this unfair abuse that he never wants to be audacious again.
It really is a pathetic "hacker" move if the plan was "Let's just flaunt the rules, land in 'hostile' territory and hope the punishment isn't so severe.". So far his talent is operating a plane, lots of people can do that.
An actual hacker would figure out something clever to not be caught, be arrested/detained for several weeks (de facto if not de jure), and relying on daddy's dollars to bail him out...
It is often easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission. Flaunting the rules was probably his only option for getting into Antarctica. I imagine for many hackers in the past, their best hope of getting to play with a serious computer was to hack into one. The motivation is what matters. If your goal is to do crime and profit, then yes, not getting caught is very important. But if your goal is curiosity or to tell a compelling story to your followers about how you did something no one's ever done before, then that comes from a pure innocent heart. Such a person is unlikely to have spent much time in their life developing the skills needed to not get caught. So I wouldn't hold that against them. It's on the system to forgive such persons. If what they did was actually cool and prosocial, then they shouldn't be punished for breaking the rules to do it.
> everything I believe in as a hacker
> beautiful
Really?
Also, when one plane collides with another, both planes are protected by soft cocoons of freedom, comfort and idealism.
Cocoons didn't work on January 29th this year. Thank God, no teenager was trying to achieve anything there. Just boring adults doing boring jobs as per rules and regulations.
>insanity of his stunt
He flew from one airport to another airport without permission of the local bureaucracies? I mean you get fined for breaking the rules but it doesn't seem that insane.
> another airport
not just another airport , a _military_ airport
good luck trying that in the US
Seems his intention was to get people to donate a million US dollars for him to give to charity.
Filing a false flight plan and landing at a South American military base in Antarctica in a completely inadequate plane, without authorization, is a bold move.
He's lucky it was just expensive.
But he did get the publicity he was looking for.
If you're going to illegally fly to Antarctica, probably makes sense to wait until the summer time?
The US bases on the continent have no flights in or out between mid-February and late October.
http://archive.today/UWC2w
Looks like Guo’s private pilot license is still active [1].
(I’ve flagged the CNN article [2] to the FAA.)
[1] https://amsrvs.registry.faa.gov/airmeninquiry/Main.aspx
[2] https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/02/americas/us-teen-ethan-gu...
By “flagged” do you mean to say that you’ve reported him to the FAA?
> you’ve reported him to the FAA?
Yes.
I feel safer already.
Reminds me of that guy[1][2] a few years ago who jumped out of his running airplane deliberately staging its crash. I guess I just don't understand the YouTube economy. How are these stunts cost effective? This probably means no more flying ever for both of these "influencer" guys. So, what's their plan after they get caught and lose their license and/or do time in prison?
1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31104691
2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35909203
You're over thinking this, their plan is to not be caught.
I think the question is how one recoups the cost of crashing a plane. I know youtubers who make 5 to 6 figures, but they have to keep posting content that gets watched. One "crash my plane" video doesn't seem like a big money maker.
Do something illegal and post it to the internet for everyone to see…
Brilliant plan.
> touching down on a portion of Antarctica claimed by Chile
It is worth pointing out that no other nation acknowledges Chile's claim to this part of Antarctica. And in fact, several other countries claim the same territory.
It doesn't make landing there a good idea, but it's not really an invasion of sovereign Chilean territory in a sane way. Chile claims an enormous portion of Antarctica which they exert absolutely 0 sovereignty over in practice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_Antarctic_Territory. In fact, two of the three US antarctic bases (Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station and Palmer station) are in their claimed territory, and I can assure you that US researchers do not ask Chile's permission to enter and leave.
You can call this a dumb stunt without giving credence to the goofy south american land claims Chile and Argentina are prone to making.
He landed near/at a Chile's base and is in Chile's custody. For purposes of this the claim is valid since Chile is able to enforce it and nobody else will oppose them doing so.
In general you are correct the claim isn't recognized, but it doesn't apply here.
He overflew Chile proper on his way into their territorial claims. So call it what you will but he filed a false flight plan with their regulatory body and he should face some consequences for it. The fact that his destination is in disputed territory doesn't mitigate any of that. The Chilean military and civilian bodies are being very lenient.
What was he thinking :)
But seeing teenagers do not think, I believe the court made the correct decision. Hopefully he can meet the court's requirements and is able to leave safely.
Entitled US influencer also learns that is it not a good idea flying to Antarctica in the middle of winter. Glad he didn't endanger anybody else, that is also a miracle.
Damn. The president of Antarctica had to have been livid.
[dead]
[dead]
The phrasing of this is very funny to me. How dare he land without permission, he should have flown circles until his fuel ran out and he crashed! /s
Or he shouldn't have changed his flight plan without letting the ATC know, these things cause massive headaches for everyone else. ATC can't have regular service running when there's a rogue flight in the air.
He's lucky he is getting off with a slap on the wrist basically. The entitlement some people have is bewildering.
There are many ways to get approval for a flight to the Antarctic. Do it the right way.
I bet there's huge air traffic in Antarctic. He surely inconvenienced many busy penguins.
Searching for his name shows he's been there since June, and that his original flight plan was just to fly over Puntas Arenas, which is about 1240 km away from the airbase he ended up at.
I wish there's a way to punish lawyers (and defendants) who deliberately lie.
Imagine a foreign small aircraft landing on an American air base without permission.
It's happened many times. Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5YGdNJqbO0
I know it's not unheard of, but I'm saying it's not going to be a nothing event.
It would definitely be blown to bits before ever getting the chance to land if there was no response from the pilot lol
There are several ways to respond. They include I don't have a working radio but I need to land now. Control towers know these procedures exist and will look them up when needed (they are used so rarely that nobody remembers them). So long as you are acting like a pilot who in an emergency you will be fine in general. (of course if you are acting like an emergency in a way that would allow you to pull a 9-11 attack on something important they will shoot, but it isn't the default).
"Stranded" implies he is physically stuck, but the article contradicts itself on several points.
> "I remain in Antarctica awaiting approval for my departure flight"
> He was not forced to stay there, only to remain in Chilean territory
> He must also leave the country as soon as conditions allow
> Guo’s plane “does not have the capabilities to make a flight”
As a reader, it's hard to understand exactly what is happening. This is very poor reporting.
The most interesting detail in buried in the last paragraph:
> The prosecutor’s office said Guo must also pay all costs for his “aircraft security and personal maintenance” during his stay at the military facility. He also needs to cover all expenses for his return.
So the real reason he is "stranded" is extortion.
> Guo’s plane “does not have the capabilities to make a flight”
> The prosecutor’s office said Guo must also pay all costs for his “aircraft security and personal maintenance” during his stay at the military facility. He also needs to cover all expenses for his return.
They may be unwilling or unable to sell him 60 gallons of 100LL avgas. It's not like he's just pulling up to the FBO at a local airstrip. There are thousands of locations across the country and across the world where aviators can just land, taxi to a tiedown and fuel up, and take off...the Chilean military base in Antarctica is not one of those places.
Do you think the base has some outdoor tiedown locations in the Antarctic winter, or keeps hangar space available for recreational pilots? Are they going to requisition fuel from the mainland, or dip into their supplies? They may be looking at the weather and saying that he can't take off without deicing and engine temp control provisions that his Cessna 182 does not have. He needs to fly some 800 miles in an aircraft with about 1000 miles of range into Antarctic winter weather, he only has a few hours of daylight per day which may not be enough to fly VFR from Antarctica to Chile, depending on the winds through the notorious Drake Passage.
From the perspective of the base commander, there's a very young man (almost still a child) who is asking to buy the military's fuel as if it were for sale and asking him to change flight schedules and get permission from the tower to unwisely take off and put himself into a potentially lethal situation. The commander has probably refused the same requests from trainees with inadequate hours or certifications, or whose aircraft were not rated for the weather at the moment, and has managed to keep hundreds of his charges alive in a very hostile environment. "Teenager stranded at base" is not a headline he wants to publish, but "Teenager lost in Drake Passage after receiving fuel and takeoff clearance at base" is far, far worse.
Nah, not extortion. All self-inflicted idiocy. He's caused headaches for all these places, he should pay for the headaches.
I don't think it classifies as extortion when it's a plea deal to avoid being prosecuted for breaking multiple laws and potentially going to jail.
the only difference between extortion and a fine is “due process”
remember, sometimes the mob has better rates
"only difference" and the quotes around "due process" are doing a lot of very heavy lifting there, trying to falsely equate due process and extortion
The entire point of Due Process is that it is NOT extortion. It is entirely designed to gather and weigh the facts, with respect to impartial laws created to maintain society.
While due process may fall short of those goals in some jurisdictions, acting like it is the literal same as extortion works only to further degrade society. You really do NOT want to live in a society with only extortion by local warlords, being themselves extorted by regional warlords, etc...
Plea bargains are legal extortion. Nothing else. Pay us and we won't try to make your life living hell. There's no justice in that and it's a shameful practice of any legal system that allows it.
Call a plea bargain a distortion or corruption of due process, but even with plea bargains, due process is far less bad than extortion.
Plea bargains, within limits and when not abused are also sensible for both sides. An accused who is guilty can benefit from a years-lighter sentence by saving the prosecutor's office thousands of hours of work by taking a bargain. Or, they can always decline the bargain, go to trial, and potentially walk away acquitted, or be subject to the full legal penalty if convicted.
Where plea bargains go horribly wrong is when used against the innocent as a means of coercion to extract a conviction, and yes, that is extortion-like and a corruption of due process.
> Plea bargains, within limits and when not abused are also sensible for both sides.
I disagree completely. The purpose of a just court is to establish what happened and administer appropriate punishment regardless of what either side thinks or what is convenient for them. Without this basic honesty the whole system is a mockery.
> Plea bargains are legal extortion. Nothing else. Pay us and we won't try to make your life living hell
It’s closer to bribery than extortion. He should be in jail. He won’t be because he can pay.
would you prefer I used italics instead?
one time I was forming a business in a state, in person. The price was $70 now, and I wanted to speed that up, as I was pulling out my kickback funds, they said I could do expedited processing for $200. The state actually codified expedited processing for $200 in a prescribed legislative process.
the only difference between the categorization of this transaction was due process.
Got it. So in your world, everything where you don't get the best service for the cheapest price is extortion because you think you are entitled to that.
Paying extra for expedited service is standard almost everywhere. Next you'll be telling us FedEx is extortionist because they charge 5X to deliver a package before 10AM tomorrow instead of before 8PM three days from now. "They're still just putting the box on a plane and truck and dropping it off...". And because UPS and USPS also charge more for faster service, they are a colluding cartel extorting everyone, along with your states' Business Bureau (or whatever it's called), and the US Passport service which also charges iirc $150 extra for an expedited passport.
Due Process is not extortion because 1) it is a standard process based on fairness to arrive at the cost or penalty, and 2) it is THE SAME for everyone. The legislature decided on a process, presumably with input from their bureaus that it required X extra work to expedite, and came up with $200.
If it was extortion, it would be the worker at the desk saying" I'm the only one on duty today, and you need it today, pay me (sticks finger in wind) $450 for expedited service".
Learn the actual meanings of concepts before you use them Sheesh
Extorsion?
He lied about his flight plan, didn't ask for authorization to land on a remote military base, endangered himself and others, all this for personal aggrandizement (and he is using kids with cancer to cover for his ego trip)
He is very much stranded, as a civilian on a military base, they are just chucking all procedure and rules out, he does not officialy exist, but gets fed and a bed, and razzed and razzed and razzed, sounds like he held up, though it will likely be impossible for him to fly out as it would need special attention to get the plane running if it was left to freeze solid, and departure clearance will have to come from the minister in charge and then he could end up waiting for 6 months for good weather..... guy did a polar circumnavigation in a RV kitplane, very serious extended range
I'd have massive schadenfreude if red tape prevents him from leaving on his plane. "You need fuel? Oh we have plenty here, but as military we can't just give you fuel, your government needs to buy it from our government who'll talk down the chain of command to us.".
"You want to fly? Your violation of the airspace laws means you're not allowed to use Chilean airspace anymore... sorry Gringo."
After entering Chilean territory illegally perhaps they should send him to killer whale Alcatraz?
Impound his plane and tell him to walk home. /s