Why Climbers Die On Mount Everest
sciencedaily.com
sciencedaily.com
http://outside.away.com/outside/destinations/199609/199609_i...
Edit: It occurs to me now that I don't think I even dismissed the author summarily, just that website... I think I will be borrowing a copy of the book from a friend.
I've heard that rescue aircraft keep a reserve of fuel on board and once the craft reach this point, they turn back. It seems that at least some of the climbers don't gauge this properly. Some are lucky. They survive. Others are not as lucky, they are the 1-2 percent statistic of dying on the way down, having pushed too hard.
On the way down, your eyes are much further away from your steps and the slope is angled away from you. Each step is longer, more dynamic and more likely to dislodge some rock / ice / snow. You are also putting a lot more force on each step so your legs can actually get more tired on the way down. When you fall you mostly go to your butt, slide and you need to roll over on your belly to self arrest. By that time you have often picked up so much speed that it's too late.
All these physical factors plus many well documented "horse to barn" psychological factors make down climbing the most dangerous part of the day.
No doubt though, the death zone could kill people playing ping pong. Yet the down-climbing problem is global to mountains of any size. The extreme altitude on Everest amplifies it. More accidents occur on the way down on mountains less than half the size of Everest. The mountaineering bible, "Freedom of the Hills" discusses the phenomenon extensively:
http://www.amazon.com/Mountaineering-Freedom-Hills-Mountaine...
It's a common problem among mountaineers that once the "goal" has been reached they rush home and make careless mistakes. They rush down "like a horse to a barn"
I've seen this problems in many different expedition sports. Once the perceived danger is past, people let their guard down and get hurt. More often than not people train for the hardest part of an expedition. They put so much effort into getting through that part, that when it's over their brain says, "I've done the hard part, the rest is a foregone conclusion." They forget that the uncertainty of their goal made them fearful which in turn made them concentrate. Once people feel more certain, the fear subsides and takes their concentration with it.
http://www.gsk.com/people/mogens/training.htm
That said, he was an asthmatic attempting to climb without O2.
I don't like those sort of comments. I think one of the reasons people go mountain climbing is because they want to take the risk. The fear of maybe not coming back alive is part of the fun. But people say stuff like that, like every single thing should be safe. I might say that people are getting paranoid over safety.
For me the bottom line is: I surely don't want to get killed doing some boring job, but I hope to die doing something awesome and exciting.
Sure there are some risky activities that would interest me, but at the end of the day, there are more than enough interesting alternatives that are a lot less risky.
People who take those sort of risks don't think they will be in the n% of people that die doing it, but that they'll be able to survive despite it being hard and dangerous. Some don't survive, but those who do get their kicks for beating the odds, that sort of stuff. Of course, that's not for everyone. Most people want the most safety possible, that's why we live in cities and try to make the environment the most controlled possible.
Now it might not seem like much, but as I get older I am more willing to take risks because of this stuff. My risk threshold is basically one in 50,000. If it's more risky than that it's just not worth it IMO. At 70 I will probably have a lower threshold but for now I am happy, healthy, and hopefully have many more years ahead so taking 1% death risk seems stupid.