UKC

Wow. I thought this was a joke because of the ludicrously over the top video, but apparently it's true:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMryDYYUaco&feature=youtu.be

Have a look at the guys website:
http://www.mission14.org/index.html

Somehow this will cost $5.6 million! Each 8000er will therefore be climbed for the bargain price of only $400,000. I don't know how its possible for it to be that expensive.

For something that repeatedly bills itself as 'The Worlds Toughest Expedition' it seems odd that a mere 3780 porters will be used, and oxygen above 7000m on every mountain.

In reply to Topper Harley:

Just saw it on Alpinist. Words fail me.

In reply to Topper Harley:

Stimulates my gag reflex.

In reply to Topper Harley: I'm not sure what to say.

In reply to Topper Harley: Very annoying video that.

In reply to Topper Harley: I cannot believe what I have just seen and read. As per all the You Tube comments, if this dude is supposedly doing it for charity and not for his ego, just donate the $5.6 million to charity. I'm lost for words. This makes Bear Grylls look humble.

In reply to Topper Harley: I wish them all the best but I really hope their car breaks down on the way to airport and never starts again.

In reply to GuyVG: Wow, their car must have done something really offensive - I shant ask what tho

In reply to Topper Harley:
On the fellow's web-site it says that Mission 14(TM) is a non-profit. Initially I assumed that this meant that Mission 14 is a non-profit making organisation,but written with typical media bad grammar.
Since thinking about it further I have decided that it was a spelling mistake.
Mission 14 is a non-Prophet, so that is why they are asking for donations(albeit it lamely).What they really need donating is a prophet, "now let me see, where did I put that boy called Messiah from Tennessee?".....

In reply to Topper Harley: Yuck Indeed.
Not your average punter according to his bio, but he seems to be missing the bit about turning around at the right moment to avoid a freezing storm death, placing a bit too much emphasis on the old positive mental attitude, sufficient injection of other peoples cash and blind faith to get up.
Here's hoping he gets it done safely and makes a mint for those charitable elements. Otherwise it'll be a sad tale.

In reply to Topper Harley:

Let the jumaring commence! :P

In reply to Topper Harley:

Annapurna, K2, AND Kanchenjunga in a year, not forgetting the rest? How do you rush these mountains? This is just asking for trouble.

In reply to Topper Harley: His faith in Christ will get him through it!

Aye right.......

Feed him to the lions

In reply to Topper Harley:
>...it seems odd that a mere 3780 porters will be used...

It does, and I really don't get that. That's an average of 270 per peak? How is it even possible to use that many?

In reply to Topper Harley:

Random thoughts

Opening shot..Nice pic of Ama Dablam. I heard the UIAA is making some new 8,000 m peaks but wasn't aware that trusty AD was advancing so rapidly.

http://www.thehimalayantimes.com/fullNews.php?headline=Nepal+has+5+more+8%2...

For the record, I am willing to do this for $ 5.5 million and with 3,760 porters.

Are you sure, we aren't all being trolled.

In reply to radson:
I would like to see the proposed timetable because, as said above, kind of unwise to rush through this.

Also I thought I recognised the sherpas on the video (at 1:47), then I realised that I also recognised the picture since I took it in 2009!

https://picasaweb.google.com/107903823977714444773/ChoOyuSeptember2009#5388...

In reply to abseil:

They do the maths for that in "The Ascent of Run Doodle".

In reply to Topper Harley:

I've thought in the past about trying the five Snow Leopard Peaks in a summer for a laugh. It would be incredibly difficult (borderline impossible) to achieve but would fun to try all the same with the view that 'failure' was highly likely. Plus it would be a lot cheaper and low key!

Reckon we'll have more fun. Three middle aged blokes, no sherpas, no fixed rope, no Oxygen, 3 pairs of skis, 1 X 8,000m peak, budget as little as possible. If you want to follow, https://www.facebook.com/skishishapangma have a look.

In reply to Mr. Lee:

Yeh. I looked into it early last year before going to Peak Lenin. Main problem is not dying on Pobeda like plenty seem to do (two last year). Second problem was they now only fly into Comm/Korz on one or two dates in mid-July, so you need to organise everything around that. Ideally you would do Lenin before those two, which puts you at Lenin in mid-June, which is early (deep snow, bad avos). Then you end up on the bad side of KT if you want to be close for Pobeda. And doing all five of them in a row didn't work out much cheaper than three individual trips.

In reply to davidbeynon:

>...it seems odd that a mere 3780 porters will be used...
>It does, and I really don't get that. That's an average of 270 per peak? How is it even possible to use that many?


They do, here's the quotation, sorry it's long:

“The object of the expedition was to place two men on the summit of Rum Doodle. This necessitated the establishment of a camp at 39,000 feet stocked with a fortnight’s supplies for two… The equipment for this camp had to be carried from the railhead at Chaikhosi, a distance of 500 miles. Five porters would be needed for this. Two porters would be needed to carry the food for these five, and another would carry the food for these two. His food would be carried by a boy. The boy would carry his own food. The first supporting party would be established at 38,000 feet, also with a fortnight’s supplies, which necessitated another eight porters and a boy. In all, to transport tents and equipment, food, radio, scientific and photographic gear, personal effects, and so on, 3,000 porters and 375 boys would be required”.

In reply to veteye: I do love the phrase "non profit making". What that actually means is that we can pay our executives whatever we like just so that on the balance sheet we can show we made no profit.

If you are STUPID enough to donate money to this sham please ask where you think your money will be spent? Will it go direct to the starving children, will it go direct to a charity with vast experience of dealing with charitable monies in 3rd world countries or will it go to by a new 'pretty hat' for one of the flunkies taking a holiday to Nepal.

If this expedition fails to get off the ground (don't pardon the pun), do you think the starving children will get first dibs on the donated money?


THE WORLD TOUGHEST EXPEDITION?

"To ensure speed and safety as Mission 14™ strives for a 100% success rate, Nick’s team will climb the ‘normal’ routes on all 14 peaks, and will use supplemental oxygen above 23,000 feet"

Nick Ciensk - YOU F#CKING DISGUST ME. How much money are you putting into this expedition yourself? How much money do you Guarantee to give to charity?

In reply to Topper Harley:

I'm confused. At the end of all those budget and porter figures, it clearly says "1 Mission". Now, is that to get to the top of all 14 peaks in a year, or is it to help disadvantaged children?

Still, I supposed it's a change from sponsored organised 3 Peaks trips....

In reply to Topper Harley: words fail me.

In reply to Topper Harley:

Meanwhile, over at supertopo
http://www.supertopo.com/inc/photo_zoom.php?dpid=Oj00PzgpJiAhIw,,

In reply to Topper Harley:

Given mortality rate

About 40% for Annapurna, 20% each for K2 and Kanchenjunga,+ 11 others of course, he'll almost definitely be dead before he finishes.

In reply to MikeTS: Where did you get those figures from?

In reply to Topper Harley: Interesting times. I think he is American. I deduce that from his 'money and resources will beat any adversary into submission' approach to this 'mission'. I was relived to discover that he had faith in Christ. My guess is that he will meet him soon.

Anyway, I have to say that I don't think anyone, including Nick, considers this to be a realistic prospect. I think he will generate a profile based on an heroic effort leading to near tragedy and the triumph of the human spirit over adversity. In the meantime, it will have kick started his 8,000er tick list and he will get a book deal.

Alternatively, he is a 21st Century Earl Denham. I can't help but agree with an earlier post that $5m is probably better invested in other things - such as rubbish clearups on the 8,000m peaks or helping children.

For many, mountaineering has become an 'extreme sport'. Good luck to them.

In reply to Charlie Burbridge:

Meh, poor attempt at a pair of insults. Especially since he's Canadian (part of the Commonwealth, last I checked).

Besides, if he was American he wouldn't need corporate sponsorship to pay for the expeditions... he'd fund it all through subprime mortgage loans and credit default swaps. Get it straight.

In reply to Jim Walton:

Yeh agree what an egotistical Cnut!! Hopefully he won't get past the first one

In reply to Topper Harley:

Makes Messner look like a bit of a punter !

According to his site he's summited Broad Peak. So he should be able to knock that one off again in a couple of hrs !!!!

In reply to chris fox:

According to the American Alpine Journal, 1991, he 'reached the foresummit (8030 meters, 26,346 feet) on July 1 [1990], but they made no effort to continue to the main summit (8047 meters, 26.400 feet)m which lies an hour further on'.

And Googling variations of 'first Canadian to summit Broad Peak' doesn't seem to produce anything useful either.

In reply to AndyC:

Interesting background. Thanks Andy

In reply to Topper Harley:

He's got no chance. Too many variables and elements of luck on mountains that big.

In reply to Topper Harley: This guy is a muppet. I announce I am planning to climb not the 14, but the 15 highest mountains in the world. All that in only one month. To guarantee success I will have to hire Simone Moro who will drop me on top of each mountain.

This is Extreme Final PR Stunt Mission 15©.

I have a budget of £8M. I would be glad if you could contribute to it by sending donations to a Mr drolex, Cheshire. Some of this budget will almost certainly be donated to charities.

Unfortunately I can also already announce that the mission will fail, mostly because I won't leave my couch. But be assured that your donations will find a useful purpose, like buying an Aston Martin to flatter my ego.

In reply to drolex:
>...I would be glad if you could contribute to it by sending donations to a Mr drolex, Cheshire... I can also already announce that the mission will fail...

There's a cheque in the mail. But take care on that couch...

In reply to Jamie B:

I think even trying to do Everest K2 and Kangchenjunga in a year would be tough enough for any experienced 8000er

In reply to chris fox: I understand that Everest with oxygen from 7000m shouldn't be too hard? But making the "hard" ones like Kangchenjunga, K2 or Annapurna in one year definitely sounds completely unrealistic. Not that I have any experience on this, of course.

I bet one banana he won't make it (frostbite on second summit is my guess)

In reply to Topper Harley: How awful, and to drag into it disadvantaged children

I'm sure he can go and tell all these kids how good life is when you have enough cash to blow millions on your ego!

In reply to Topper Harley:

A smart and suave man, name of Cienski
Climbed 14 peaks on a spree.
Saying "For my next trick,
I don’t want to look like a *****,
So I’ll ride a bike down to the Dead Sea".

(Sorry, wrong thread)

In reply to The_flying_climber:

In this case

http://mentalfloss.com/article/30757/5-mountains-deadlier-everest

But the figures are in many places

In reply to abseil:
>

It's very easy. I have

In reply to MikeTS:

More accurately, here: http://www.mounteverest.net/story/stories/EvrstvsBigMa-killrstatistisMar220...

But they are overall deaths on each peak compared to the number who have summited that peak. While that might be interesting statistically, it doesn't really indicate the danger of going there. From the point of view of actually going to climb the peak, the number of deaths as a proportion of those attempting the peak is more useful. But that of course is a smaller and less impressive number...

I'm enjoying the discussion on Mountain Project about this. Highlights include:


http://www.mountainproject.com/v/extreme-mountaineering-or-extreme-bs-i-thi...

In reply to Damo:

This is a good point that is rarely raised. The media often come out with ridiculous stats like '1 in 10 who summit Everest die' etc which is completely inaccurate. If that was the case there would have been 60 deaths on Everest this past season. Summit/death ratio is only really useful for comparing the relative dangers of mountains, so you can see for example that K2 is statistically about 16 or 17 times as dangerous as Cho Oyu, or whatever. A summit/death rate of 25% for K2 does not mean you have a 1 in 4 chance of dying, it just shows you that it is 'pretty risky'.

As Damo mentioned, a much more accurate way of expressing the danger involved in attempting a given mountain is looking at how many people have attempted it vs number of deaths. (completely ignore summits) This shows that even attempting Annapurna with it's often quoted 40% death rate in fact only carries a 4% risk of dying. Everest is only 1.4%.(accurate as of 2006) Source:
http://www.himalayandatabase.com/downloads/HimalayaByNbrs.pdf p87

There is a slightly more up to date table of stats for all 8000ers here (still about a decade old though):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-thousander
Importantly, it gives a break down of summit/death ratio for each mountain before 1990 and after 1990, so you can see a huge difference in some cases - notably Nanga Parbat with its pre 1990 77% (!) death rate, but post 1990 it is only 5.5%.

All summit/death ratios are skewed towards being higher than what the actual risk is today because climbing 8000ers has got considerably safer in recent years and they don't take into account all the people that attempt a mountain and neither summit nor die. If you have to look at summit/death ratios, then using the the post 1990 figure gives you a much more accurate picture of the dangers of a particular mountain if you were going to attempt it tomorrow.

If you take the above figure of 1.4% for overall risk of dying on Everest, then add the thousands of ascents and comparatively few deaths that have happened since 2006, it would likey come down significantly to closer to 1%. Then take into account that a huge proportion of the deaths happened pre-commercialisation and you would probably end up with an acutal risk of dying on Everest of even less than 1%, probably closer to 0.5%, if you attempt it now.

In reply to Topper Harley: though in this case I'd be still more interested in the ratio failed attempts (inc. death)/total attempts