Forum search & shortcuts

Everest Bodies
 

[Closed] Everest Bodies

 hora
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I think that's a cop out.

No its not. You are in a very savage and cruel part of nature. Everyone who goes up there KNOWS its very dangerous.

Just as when a ready supply of food runs out in a natural disaster, people suddenly become more primitive. You have to.

We can sit in our warm offices though, throwing scorn by the shedload at those who don't fit our idea of chivalry and justice.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 12:29 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Glentress black. You buy your Orange Five and your Audi but nothing prepares you for the redemption climb. Place is littered with corpses. I had to kick an accountant in the face to complete my lap the other day- I'm sure he'd understand.

šŸ˜†

reminds me of that change a movie title by one letter [url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/think-of-a-film-remove-one-letter-from-the-title-describe-the-film/page/6#post-3760413 ]thread[/url]:

Rusty Spanner:
Ride & Prejudice - The tragic tale of a man who turns up at Llandegla in a Lada with an Apollo on the roof.
He is shunned.

I still giggle over that one, best STW post ever.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 12:32 pm
Posts: 151
Free Member
 

If 1 in 10 die just trying to get themselves on/off the top that tells you it's beyond anything normal. How many would die trying to carry someone with them? 9 in 10?

It's not like having a bit of a walk in the snow.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 12:33 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

If 1 in 10 die just trying to get themselves on/off the top

Don't repeat the false information.

It makes it sound true.

I'm not saying it's not harsh, but 1 in 10 isn't true.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 12:36 pm
Posts: 8424
Free Member
 

5thElefant - Member

If 1 in 10 die just trying to get themselves on/off the top that tells you it's beyond anything normal. How many would die trying to carry someone with them? 9 in 10?

It's not like having a bit of a walk in the snow.

Couldn't you be bothered reading any of the thread?

This is 7 posts above you:

That's not really an accurate figure.

Since 2000 there have been 69 deaths and 5048 successful summits

So more like 1.4 in 100 rather than 1 in 10

And that's not counting all the many many unsuccessful summit attempts that aren't included in the above numbers.

It's still pretty harsh, but 1 in 10 is a bit off.

Of course, 1 in 10 makes it sound so much more romantic, doesn't it? (And maybe also gives more justification to those who walk past people who they may be to help..)


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 12:39 pm
Posts: 16221
Free Member
 

I've been in a blizzard at 5,500 metres. I was exhausted, confused and disorientated due to the lack of oxygen and visibility. I can't imagine how difficult it would be at 8,000 metres+.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 12:44 pm
Posts: 9112
Free Member
 

hora - Member

Just as when a ready supply of food runs out in a natural disaster, people suddenly become more primitive. You have to.

We can sit in our warm offices though, throwing scorn by the shedload at those who don't fit our idea of chivalry and justice.

My office is currently freezing, so can I get a scorn-throwing pass?


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 12:47 pm
Posts: 151
Free Member
 

Couldn't you be bothered reading any of the thread?

Not really, no.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 1:03 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Couldn't you be bothered reading any of the thread?

Not really, no.

At least you are honest about it I suppose 😐

It does make your contribution a bit pointless though.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

So more like 1.4 in 100 rather than 1 in 10

Apologies, my mistake. Sure i read 1 in 10 over the entire history of the mountain somewhere in one of the earlier links. Either way it's probably more relevant to consider a recent timeframe.

Just for reference Wikipedia says...

There have been 219 fatalities recorded on Mount Everest from the 1922 British Mount Everest Expedition through the end of 2010, a rate of 4.3 fatalities for every 100 summits (this is a general rate, and includes fatalities amongst support climbers, those who turned back before the peak, those who died en route to the peak and those who died while descending from the peak). Of the 219 fatalities, 58 (26.5%) were climbers who had summited but did not complete their descent.[78] Though the rate of fatalities has decreased since the year 2000 (1.4 fatalities for every 100 summits, with 3938 summits since 2000), the significant increase in the total number of climbers still means 54 fatalities since 2000: 33 on the northeast ridge, 17 on the southeast ridge, 2 on southwest face, and 2 on north face.[78]


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 1:19 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Apologies, my mistake. Sure i read 1 in 10 over the entire history of the mountain somewhere in one of the earlier links.

The figure over the entire history up to last season would be something like 3.8 deaths per 100 successful summits.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 1:31 pm
Posts: 28593
Free Member
 

I wonder what the figure is for non-Sherpa climbers? Obviously I know that Sherpas do die on Everest, but less frequently above 8000m - and most guided expeditions would include quite a few sherpas summiting as part of the team. I think there was one sherpa recently reported has having more than 20 visits to the top.

Would skew the figures about death rate above 8000m a bit, I suppose, although perhaps not back up to the 1 in 10 figure so often quoted.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 1:41 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Three numbers relate to the period 1921 - 2006 so not totally up to date :

The overall mortality rate was 1.3 percent, the rate for climbers (mostly non-natives) at 1.6 percent and the rate for Sherpas, natives of the region and usually acclimatized to high elevations, at 1.1 percent.

So no, still nowhere near 1 in 10.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 2:02 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I wonder what the figure is for non-Sherpa climbers?

All the stats:

http://www.adventurestats.com/tables/EverestAgeFat.shtml


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 3:10 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

Wow those stats are interesting:

Everest up to 2007 - 3000 summits and approx 200 deaths
K2 up to 2008 - 300 summits and 77 deaths!

I knew K2 was harder and more dangerous than Everest but I didn't realise how much more dangerous.

There have been a couple of bad years on Everest since those stats finish so the numbers will have risen a fair bit since then.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 3:55 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Not as bad as Annapurna... from Wikipedia...

Annapurna I has the greatest fatality rate of all the 14 eight-thousanders: as of March 2012, there have been 52 deaths during ascents, 191 successful ascents, and nine deaths upon descent, which means that "for every three thrill-seekers that make it safely up and down Annapurna I, one dies trying."[7] That same ratio is at or above six-to-one for all of the other eight-thousanders, except for K2 and Nanga Parbat.[7] Climbers killed on the peak include Russian Anatoli Boukreev in 1997, Spaniard IƱaki Ochoa in 2008,[19] and Korean Park Young-seok, lost in 2011.[20]


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 4:18 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

throwing scorn by the shedload at those who don't fit our idea of chivalry and justice.

This sentence needs a rewrite.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 4:19 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

Cheers Mr Blobby - I need to re-read that Chris Bonnigton book on his Annapurna ascent, it was gripping.


 
Posted : 19/11/2013 4:36 pm
Page 4 / 4