the helicopter

I wonder if they over-dramatized the difficulty of flying at that altitude. There was a copter that landed on Everest, and the record altitude is 40,000+.

I can't speak to the cost of the helicopter rescue, but the difficulty (and danger) of flying at that altitude, in that location, was not over-dramatized. Given the times and equipment available, it was a tour de force, and a very brave and risky feat on the part of Col. Madan KC.

You have to bear in mind that while the altitude, with the very thin air that challenges lift to the copter was one major factor, the high winds and downdrafts into the valley were competing dangers - the risk was less that the copter wouldn't make the altitude, than that it could easily be blown into the valley walls.

The landing on Everest, and several subsequent record-breaking mountain rescues (including one on Annapurna, where Col. Madan earlier tried unsuccessfully to rescue Anatoli Boukreev in 1998) have been documented, most of them involving a particular helicopter, variations of the Eurocopter AS350, which date after the 1996 Everest disaster. Col. Madan flew an AS 350 in the 1996 rescue, but it was an earlier model. The pilot who successfully landed on Everest's summit in 2005 did so with a stripped-down version of the craft (no passenger seats etc.) and it is still deemed impossible at this time to rescue people from that high up on the mountain.


Here's an account of an equally challenging rescue by Col. Madan on Cho Oyu a few years later:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/05/21/1053196640120.html

reply share

add reply

formatting help