On the one hand, it strikes me as facially ridiculous to contend that 40 people working in concert would not have been able to get this one guy back down to the camp. Hell, anything they did - even if they dragged him at the end of a rope - would have given him more of a chance of survival than just leaving him there. And divers practice sharing regulators - don’t tell me that 40 folks a portion of the way into their ascent would not have been able to spare some O for this guy, or had some fabric to wrap his hands…
OTOH - the dead guy sounds like a complete idiot. And I’m not entirely certain how much a single person’s lifethreatening stupidity should - heck, I’ll say it - even inconvenience other folks. I think I might feel differently if the climber had simply had some bad luck - broken his leg maybe, while exercising normal care for a climber in that situation. If that were the case it would have been the “There but for the grace of God…” situation, where one feels pretty obligated to assist. But he was pushing the envelope climbing alone and inadequately prepared. For some reason, in my mind, that somewhat lessens the obligations of others towards him.
I’m not showing my hand here, but what would you do if you were getting off the jet on your way to your Jamaican Paradise Family Vacation and you saw a home-less person obviously on their last leg and begging you for help? Do you become the first person (out of presumably thousands) to help the person, or do you get to your hotel ASAP?
It’s pure conjecture on my part but I find it hard to believe these climbers are much different than ourselves with regard to compassion for their fellow man, especially since they can relate to an injured party’s plight even better than ourselves and know full well they may someday find themselves in similar circumstances.
If Sharp had been on the mountain all night without gloves or oxygen, I’m guessing he wasn’t crawling on his knees to his would be rescuers and pleading for them to save him. He probably was not only unconscious but was suffering from irreversable brain, organ and muscle damage. His body was shutting down and all the oxygen in the world wouldn’t have brought him back.
Would I have left him? Hell no. Can I blame others for taking a more calculated, rational, less- impassioned view of the situation? No again.
When it comes right down to it, Sharp screwed up. He didn’t follow established rules regarding timing. He has no Sherpa. He didn’t bring enough oxygen. And he did all this in a most deadly environment and of his own free will. If he put himself in a situation where others might be risking their own lives to save him then my frustration is towards him. If he was decidedly beyond help then I’ll let those that passed him decide for themselves what was appropriate in those circumstances.
And to add, what the heck good would it do to give the guy oxygen when you can’t get him off the mountain anyway? He’s a dead man now, or three hours from now after your oxygen runs out. You’re just prolonging his death and possibly causing undue pain and suffering buy keeping his brain alive with oxygen.
even sven Think about the last time when you got very sick and you were achey, very tired and simple tasks were very difficult. Add to this not being able to get enough air, even with O2, every time you try to di a simple task - and think this is how you feel even right after you wake up. Now you have to get your gear on and climb this mountain, after you climbed a mountain yesterday and the day before…
You are not fresh in the morning, every step is a challenge, thinking beyaond your task even a bigger challenge. You feal like shit on the bottom of someone’s shoe.
This is a point of no rest, even sleep takes it’s toll on you and gives you no relief, it just wears you down a bit slower.
Those plans involve getting yourself and your group down, not another incapacitated climber. If he’d been in better shape, they might have made an attempt - the article cites radio calls in which the able climbers were told that there was nothing they could do if he’d been there for some time without oxygen. He’d been there overnight. Anyone helping him would be putting themselves into an incredibly dangerous situation (far more dangerous than the climb and descent they’d already planned) for what was most likely a lost cause.
Respectfully, sven, you don’t understand much about the conditions on 8000m peaks.
First off, I’m a amateur (and not very good) rock climber, like Harmonix - I’ve never been mountain climbing. That said, I’ve had a small obsession with Everest for the last, oh, eight or so years and have read (and watched) everything I can get my hands on. And everything Telemark’s said is spot on. Go back and reread his posts.
It is tragic what Everest has become - too many inexperienced climbers, too few harried guides. To rescue someone at that altitude, you’d have to have several very experienced climbers along with any number of strong inexperienced ones. The IMAX team was able to help with a summit attempt gone wrong several years ago (as mentioned in a previous post) simply because it was manned by such climbers. I don’t remember exactly who was on the team anymore, which is a shame, but I do remember that they were “names” in the climbing world. Superstars. The Michael Jordans of the climbing community. If anyone could help, it would be the IMAX guys. Your average Everest climber, while most likely in prime physical shape when compared to couch potato Snickers, is in no way equipped to attempt a mountain rescue.
Simply put, if an average Everest climber would attempt to carry someone that incapacitated down the mountain in a rescue, it could only mean death for both.
The only chance that Sharp had for survival was to get down the mountain, immediately. Yes, 40 climbers passed him on their way up. Frankly, it is impossible for any one (or any several) of these climbers to carry him down the mountain; they simply don’t have the strength, knowledge, or resources required. And giving him oxygen bottles is going to help, how? He’s already spent one night one the mountain in the Death Zone. He’s already suffering from HAPE, he might be starting to suffer from HACE (though I doubt it, HACE is fatal much more quickly), he’s hypothermic, he’s incoherent, he doesn’t have the mental capacity to stand up, correctly zip and tie his gear, or even walk. Giving him more oxygen or gear may buy him more time, but it’s not going to buy him the kind of time he’ll need for a competent, experienced rescue team to be assembled and get to him. But you’re the climber passing him, and here’s your dilemma: you scarcely have enough gear for yourself - you’ve only the bare essentials - and you know the above about his condition, you know that you’re still fairly strong and might be able to spare something, but you also know that giving him any of your gear might mean your death. His condition’s already fatal, giving him gear could very likely be fatal to you both. Do you do it? Honestly, I can’t say I would.
Every climber on Everest should know what it means to climb that mountain. They should be fully aware of the risks and the extreme likelihood of death. By climbing it, climbers assume those risks and everything that goes with them. They’ve consented to that and responsible for their choices. And at 8000m, that’s all you are - responsible for your own self. You do not have the resources to be responsible for someone else too.
Just out of curiosity, what’s the ceiling for a 'copter rescue? I realise that winds and other conditions make matters worse, but on a good day (In Everest Land) how high up can a helicopter rescue be made?
A quick google search shows helicopters with operating ceilings ranging from 4,500 to 6,000 meters - the highest I found was an Israeil military chopper with a ceiling of 6,200 meters. The summit of Everest is at 8,850; Sharp was around 8,500.
So, the following seems to be correct:
-climbing Mt. Everest can be done by most people (provided you have a LOT of money)
-it is extremely dangerous;even experienced guides lose some clients
-trying to do it by yourself is suicide
-there is no obligation to rescue anyone on Mt. Everest
-even excellent climbers can die on the mountain
So, i guess nobody is surprised by what happened. The Mt. Everest climb has become a commercial enterprise, and those who can’t pay the fare do so at their own risk.
Exactly my feelings on the subject, especially since all these climbers presumably had enough oxygen to get themselves to the peak and then back again.
Heck, even landing a helicopter at Base Camp (5,380 m) can be tricky given the weather. They’ve had a helicopter rescue from Camp I (5,900 m), and according to that article the helicopter pilot will no longer go above Base Camp unless the person to be rescued can’t be brought down (walking or by stretcher).
This poor fellow from the OP was above Camp IV (7,900 m).
Sorry, but it simply isn’t so. Moving yourself plus anything else, especially a body, is a huge difference. Adding more zombies (that’s what most people are at that altitude) to the mix doesn’t add safety, it increases risk. It’s really hard to fathom just how useless people are up there, they can literally only put one step in front of the other.
Absolutely untrue. Money alone will not get you up the mountain. You must be in amazing physical and mental shape, commited to the task, and able to function at altitude. Having known several folks who’ve been up to Everest and other high peaks I can safely say that 99% of people could not make it. Even the “tourist climbers” would put most of us to shame.
I’d be surprised if anyone feels that way. Heck, I can even forgive him for putting himself in danger, and by extension others, and would accept some of that risk myself to save him.
Where I and maybe some others might draw the line is in putting ourselves in danger when he’s (Sharp) beyond help, when his health has deteriorated to the point where he’ll die regardless.
Since the day before he’d been without oxygen from around 300 meters from the summit of the tallest mountain in the world to wherever he collapsed. There’s been no suggestion he was able to communicate or was even conscious. I have a feeling this poor sod’s fate was pretty apparent from the get go.
This is a ridiculous analogy. The situation on Everest is more akin to having one parachute for two passengers in a plane without a pilot. Passenger A brought the parachute, and it’s a custom-made chute just for him. It’s set to support his own weight, withstand the forces exerted on it when it’s opened with only one person, and deliver him to the ground at a veocity just slow enough for him to roll away without breaking a leg.
Passenger B didn’t bring a 'chute and drank himself into a stupor during the flight. He’s incapable of helping passenger A devise a way to attach them both to the parachute, and if passenger A wants to help him, he’s going to have to do everything on his own. Even if Passenger A does figure out a way to attach B to the chute, he doesn’t know if the custom-designed minimalist chute will operate effectively with both of them there.
Throw in passengers C, D, etc… they all have their own custom-fit chutes, but nobody’s parachute has been tested with anything exceeding their own weight.
Statistically, when you set out to climb Everest, you’re accepting a ~20% chance of dying on the mountain. Can you really expect a climber to double or triple that risk in order to save somebody else who a) already accepted that risk for himself and b) appears to be already beyond help?