I've learned a lot from following this tragic event - as I'm sure countless others have as well. Thank you for taking the time to inform us all and most importantly, gleaning the good lessons that can be taken from this accident and passing them along to others in the "spirit of education and safety."
Thanks for letting me know. I'd normally be much more private about the tragedy, but seeing as there were some good lessons learned that could help people climb safer or with greater understanding of the risks, I wanted to point those out.
Feedback like yours makes it easier to continue trying to bring some good out of this for the climbing community and ignore the malicious attacks that have and will likely to continue to come my way.
I myself would have been extremely private if it had happened to me, especially with all the media attention. I admire your courage in bringing this all to light (not to mention the courage at the time of the incident) and using your experience to educate us in the climbing world. Risk is all around us; we just have to assess it when we can.
Do ignore the attacks. They are nothing more than Monday morning QBing IMO by folks who have never and will never be in your shoes. I know for a fact that I would not have reacted as well or as proficiently as you did, but maybe I would do a bit better today after digesting your retrospections.
(my sincerest) Cheers,
ph
Matt Worster - May 31, 2010 7:47 pm - Hasn't voted
re: media
Just to amplify your comments . . . media accounts of any technical subject is usually rife with errors, sometimes of alarming consequence. I am reminded of this whenever I read accounts of engineering subjects, particularly projects I am working on. Although it is easy to blame the authors, I acknowledge that they are often lay people asking the questions, they are trying to take in information on an expert level, and they are then trying to express it to other lay people. Facts inevitably get scrambled and priorites and if-then relationships are hopelessy garbled.
Thanks for the addendum. Just to clarify, not all of the reports are bad, and the reporters who do really care about the story have been willing to stick around until the dust had settled to investigate accurately. I've made sure to give credit to some of those exceptions on Tom's memorial page.
Also, in retrospect, though it was a noble idea to refuse to say anything to the media until I could speak via Tom's family, I think total silence was a mistake. In the practical business of reporting, since they were interested in telling the story immediately (upsetting, but yes, it is a business and there is a strong incentive to be first), they were going to keep looking for an interview until someone - anyone - would talk with them. If I had said at least a few things in the beginning, that might have put a hold on a lot of the earlier false reporting.
Thank you for posting your accounts of this event. I have been high on Shasta in brutal winds and white-out conditions. I can appreciate the conditions you were dealing with. Good to hear you are still going up.
Well written & informative. Even if one were unaware of the circumstances surrounding this article, I would say that most of us could stand to learn one, if not many things, from this (I did). Your thirst for knowledge, discipline, and rational judgment have been present since I've known you, & have served, and will serve, you well. Thanks for sharing.
Thank you for posting your very thorough/helpful report. Is the wind data something you put together utilizing specialized software after the fact, or is it from a website?
The wind data was put together from a variety of sources that were observational, which is why I limit the coverage to areas that I was in or could see. Wind directions were what I could recall or see by looking carefully at our photos.
From our camp to the summit I checked wind speeds with an anemometer, and the wind speeds on the ridges in the distance were estimated by comparing the amount and nature of blowing snow there vs. where we were (it looked about the same, so I assumed conservatively that the wind may have been slightly faster).
The speeds on the summit and on the descent were deduced based on what the typical wind speeds were forecasted to have been on the mountain the day I descended, differentiated by my own observations of wind effects and what anecdotal evidence says those wind speeds likely were (e.g. blowing the rope horizontal, being unable to stand in the wind, leaning 45 degrees or steeper into the wind, etc.).
peakhugger - May 27, 2010 3:24 pm - Voted 10/10
Thanks again for sharingI've learned a lot from following this tragic event - as I'm sure countless others have as well. Thank you for taking the time to inform us all and most importantly, gleaning the good lessons that can be taken from this accident and passing them along to others in the "spirit of education and safety."
Keep climbing,
ph
PellucidWombat - May 27, 2010 9:38 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Thanks again for sharingThanks for letting me know. I'd normally be much more private about the tragedy, but seeing as there were some good lessons learned that could help people climb safer or with greater understanding of the risks, I wanted to point those out.
Feedback like yours makes it easier to continue trying to bring some good out of this for the climbing community and ignore the malicious attacks that have and will likely to continue to come my way.
Best,
Mark
peakhugger - May 28, 2010 3:25 am - Voted 10/10
Re: Thanks again for sharingI myself would have been extremely private if it had happened to me, especially with all the media attention. I admire your courage in bringing this all to light (not to mention the courage at the time of the incident) and using your experience to educate us in the climbing world. Risk is all around us; we just have to assess it when we can.
Do ignore the attacks. They are nothing more than Monday morning QBing IMO by folks who have never and will never be in your shoes. I know for a fact that I would not have reacted as well or as proficiently as you did, but maybe I would do a bit better today after digesting your retrospections.
(my sincerest) Cheers,
ph
Matt Worster - May 31, 2010 7:47 pm - Hasn't voted
re: mediaJust to amplify your comments . . . media accounts of any technical subject is usually rife with errors, sometimes of alarming consequence. I am reminded of this whenever I read accounts of engineering subjects, particularly projects I am working on. Although it is easy to blame the authors, I acknowledge that they are often lay people asking the questions, they are trying to take in information on an expert level, and they are then trying to express it to other lay people. Facts inevitably get scrambled and priorites and if-then relationships are hopelessy garbled.
PellucidWombat - Jun 2, 2010 1:22 am - Hasn't voted
Re: The media doesn't fact check human storiesThanks for the addendum. Just to clarify, not all of the reports are bad, and the reporters who do really care about the story have been willing to stick around until the dust had settled to investigate accurately. I've made sure to give credit to some of those exceptions on Tom's memorial page.
Also, in retrospect, though it was a noble idea to refuse to say anything to the media until I could speak via Tom's family, I think total silence was a mistake. In the practical business of reporting, since they were interested in telling the story immediately (upsetting, but yes, it is a business and there is a strong incentive to be first), they were going to keep looking for an interview until someone - anyone - would talk with them. If I had said at least a few things in the beginning, that might have put a hold on a lot of the earlier false reporting.
requiem - Jun 2, 2010 7:56 pm - Hasn't voted
Thanks, Mark!you've made me realize that in order to be safe, i have a lot to learn... and practice, and learn some more...
Schlekeway - Jun 4, 2010 9:57 pm - Hasn't voted
ThanksThank you for posting your accounts of this event. I have been high on Shasta in brutal winds and white-out conditions. I can appreciate the conditions you were dealing with. Good to hear you are still going up.
Nick
Diggler - Jun 17, 2010 3:17 am - Voted 10/10
Good job, MarkWell written & informative. Even if one were unaware of the circumstances surrounding this article, I would say that most of us could stand to learn one, if not many things, from this (I did). Your thirst for knowledge, discipline, and rational judgment have been present since I've known you, & have served, and will serve, you well. Thanks for sharing.
ywardhorner - Jun 22, 2010 11:23 am - Voted 10/10
AppreciatedYour insights are very valuable, thanks for writing this.
MountainSlayer - Jun 28, 2010 7:04 pm - Hasn't voted
WindsThank you for posting your very thorough/helpful report. Is the wind data something you put together utilizing specialized software after the fact, or is it from a website?
PellucidWombat - Jun 28, 2010 11:28 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: WindsThe wind data was put together from a variety of sources that were observational, which is why I limit the coverage to areas that I was in or could see. Wind directions were what I could recall or see by looking carefully at our photos.
From our camp to the summit I checked wind speeds with an anemometer, and the wind speeds on the ridges in the distance were estimated by comparing the amount and nature of blowing snow there vs. where we were (it looked about the same, so I assumed conservatively that the wind may have been slightly faster).
The speeds on the summit and on the descent were deduced based on what the typical wind speeds were forecasted to have been on the mountain the day I descended, differentiated by my own observations of wind effects and what anecdotal evidence says those wind speeds likely were (e.g. blowing the rope horizontal, being unable to stand in the wind, leaning 45 degrees or steeper into the wind, etc.).