Looks like this year’s climbing season is off to a morbid start. Three climbers are dead, 2 missing (presumed dead).
Hope these folks found their dream, and that it was worth it.
How many more must die? Why can’t the Nepali government fund and maintain a proper rescue service? If your paying >$60,000 to make the climb, shouldn’t there be some services there in case of an accident?
Because it’s just as dangerous (if not more so) for the rescuers.
And how do you communicate your distress in the first place?
ETA: there’s also the difficulty of finding the lost climbers.
Rescue services are for people who don’t intentionally get themselves into trouble. If you can fund your way to the top of the everest, buy your own damn rescue service.
Why does the Nepali government have to fund a proper rescue service for rich foreigners to get their kicks? I would think the Nepalese government would be and rightfully should be more worried about taking care of their own people. 25% of the population lives below the poverty level and you think they should be worried about thrill-seeking foreigners?
Not to mention that a lot of those rescuers would surely be locals, same as for the majority of the other climbing assistants/sherpas, so that would put their own citizens into harm’s way to rescue these tourists.
One article I saw on the latest disaster blamed in part the overcrowding on the mountain, with people heading up for the summit hours later than recommended due to crowds. How would stationing more people on the mountain help such a situation?
I feel this is more like “five victims fling themselves upon Mt. Everest.”
How many more must die? I imagine “however many goofballs decide to make this pointless climb” is the number to start with, and if it’s lower than that, it’s just dumb luck.
IIRC it is difficult and risky, because of altitude, to even get a helicopter up to the base camp. Forget doing rescues even higher.
A tragedy is a tragedy but I’ve got better places for my grief.
Just days ago the NY Times ran an Op-ed piece about how Everest is getting more dangerous and one very experienced company called off their expedition this year because of it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/18/opinion/dont-climb-every-mountain.html?_r=1
It’s hard to feel bad about people who voluntarily put themselves in this situation. It isn’t like climbing Everest is safe even when conditions are good.
This is right up there with hunting dangerous game when it comes to “some participants getting killed is part of the allure.” If you’re both rich enough and bored enough to want to do these things, more power to you; but all consequences are on your own head.
Do people never learn? This is exactly the situation that caused the disaster (that Jon Krakauer wrote about in “Into Thin Air”).
Agree-these folks knew what they were doing..but why not have a rescue team around-just in case?
We recently had a thread about the logistics of rescue on Everest. Bottom line is it’s just about impossible. If a dedicated rescue team (as opposed to just another climbing group implementing an ad-hoc rescue effort) is going to climb to get you, they will have to acclimate to the altitude just as you did; by the time they reach you days later, you’ll probably be dead. And if you’re not, then your rescue team is barely alive themselves, as is everyone else at that altitude; they’ll have enough difficulty getting themselves down off the mountain alive without dragging your lame ass along with them.
Helicopters have landed on the summit of Everest, but that’s a “just barely” kind of thing with a machine carefully optimized for the task. If you want an actual rescue helicopter equipped with a hoist and basket rig and a three- or four-man crew, well, that’s a lot of extra weight, and it’s not going to be able to function (i.e. hover) at the kinds of altitudes where people on Everest typically need rescue.
It may cost a climber $60K to make the ascent, but the permit only costs $10K to climb from the Nepalese side (it’s only $4K to climb from the Chinese side). As noted upthread, they use this money to make life better for their own citizens, not to rescue foreigners who made an informed decision to climb one of the most dangerous mountains in the world.
Who’s going to pay for it?
You pays your money, you takes your chances. Nobody up on that mountain doesn’t know they can die (although some of them may have lulled themselves into a false sense of security and not have the skills they’d need to climb any other giant mountain) - I really don’t have much sympathy for people who do something known to be deadly dangerous when it turns out to indeed by deadly dangerous.
I’m rooting for the mountain. Go, Mt. Everest!!!
Since you’ve been posting these same (IMO) silly questions in every Everest thread for several years now, my guess would be no.
It’s been explained to you a dozen times that rescue is practically impossible up there, but you still think it’s just a matter of stationing a few people to hang around up there and guide climbers back down like so many Boy Scouts helping little old ladies across the street.
I like this idea. Station Boy Scouts every 1000 ft or so. How else are they supposed to get that coveted “High-Altitude Mountain Rescue” merit badge?
Climb every mountain,
Ford every stream,
Follow every rainbow,
'Till you find your dream.
I’m reminded of one of my favorite gaming comics, ever. 
:::Checks calendar::: Oh, right. It’s May again.
They don’t have to die. Staying alive is simple: don’t climb Mt. Everest. Nobody is there by accident, they made a choice to do something dangerous. I feel bad for their friends and family, I even feel a little bad for them because in general dying sucks, but I just can’t get worked up about this.
Why should they?
Even if it were possible - which it isn’t, as has been explained in multiple threads over the years - why should they? Why risk their people to save foreign tourists that deliberately put themselves at risk?
Climbing any mountain is inherently dangerous. Climbing a peak like Everest is even more inherently dangerous. The best service is to make climbing it so expensive that no one is going to find themselves there by accident. Only motivated people who make a deliberate decision to take the risk go up that mountain.
Other than that - you’re on your own. Sorry. Well, let me qualify that - non-climbers seem quite willing to rescue people off that mountain when and where feasible. Get in trouble at base camp? You can get airlifted out of there. Get in trouble and make it back to base camp? Ditto. Screw up 500 feet below the peak? AMF YOYO, unless you’re lucky enough to be in a group that has a climber(s) sufficiently strong to drag your ass back to where rescue is possible. Not likely. But a real good reason to be nice the rest of the folks in your group on the way up.
I will agree that the Nepali government has a duty to protect the public from Mt. Everest as soon as the mountain becomes mobile and begins pursuing passing pedestrians, aircraft and nation-states. Barring this, I really don’t care if people choose to kill themselves at altitude as opposed to ground-level.
Lots of Sherpas have died lately. That’s who I feel sorry for, because when they die, I doubt their grieving wife and kids have a cushy trust account to fall back on.