Lhotse and Makalu Summit Areas
Wednesday, 23 March 2022 16:19

Today the series of summit area posts continues. This time Lhotse and Makalu. In the past there were several ascents not on the true summit on both mountains, so maybe with these detailed reports it is now  possible to know, where they stopped. As soon as possible the much more difficult summit history for Manaslu, Annapurna I and Dhaulagiri I will also be explained in detail here. It seems that nearly nobody climbed all the 14 true summits and there will be no more accepted records including one or more of the false summit claims for the future and also the past. It is sure, that Miss Hawley and Xavier Eguskitza, the two main chroniclers of the past, would never have accepted all these false summits, if they had known it. Also it is just unfair to note and count false summits the same way as true summits. This is just logical.  Makalu Lhotse

Dhaulagiri and Annapurna Summit Area Update
Thursday, 20 May 2021 15:49

Recently some important additions were added to the Annapurna and Dhaulagiri Summit Area PDF´s. Especially distances are now shown for all the different "summit" points. Note that for examples the distance on Dhaulagiri to the "Metal Pole Area" is about 140 m, the distance between the Western Rocky Foresummit to the top is about 60 m; on Annapurna from Ridge Junction to the tops is about 65 m and from the tops to C0 is about 190 m.

Broad Peak Summit Details
Friday, 15 January 2021 20:59

After the detailed descriptions of Manaslu, Dhaulagiri I and Annapurna I summit ridges now the summit ridge of Broad Peak is explained in detail in PDF format. You can find it here!

True Summits or Tolerance Zones?
Wednesday, 31 July 2019 13:23

I have been collecting facts about mountains and mountaineering for four decades and I have always sincerely believed that: ‘The highest point of a mountain is the only point that counts as summit'. But in recent times, with more research and better technology, it has become apparent that this absolute topographical approach does not match the reality of climbers and the tops of the 8000m mountains. For the last seven years some colleagues and I have been researching many summit photos , particularly on the three 8000m mountains Manaslu, Annapurna I and Dhaulagiri I that have issues with their precise summit locations and their records of who climbed to where. It is clear now after all this research and communication that many mountaineers, including some well-known ones, have definitely failed to reach the very highest points on one or more of these mountains due to their uncertain topography. Instead, climbers have stopped, knowingly or not, on a selection of lower points - some near to the main summits in altitude and distance, some not so much. To deal accurately but realistically with this sensitive problem we have come to consider the possibility of ‘Summit Zones of Tolerance’. But of course even with this broadening of allowable ‘summits’ it may still affect the historical record of Himalayan climbing. Should some finishing points that are too far or below the true summit be deleted from the official summit lists? Should we have two tables of submitters - a ‘General List’ of those who stopped only within the Tolerance Zone, and then an ‘Elite List’ comprising those who can surely be proven to have stopped on the true highest point? We wish that the climbing community will assist us to find the best solutions to deal with this serious problem. There will be people who think, this is not important. Let us leave it as it is including general “amnesty” for all “historical” ascents. But many others would also love to know, how many really did all true tops of the 14. But it is not only because of the collectors with “all” 14 8000ers climbed. All country firsts, female firsts, winter firsts, route firsts and surely other firsts need to be researched properly.

Manaslu Annapurna I Dhaulagiri I

Ten Years After
Wednesday, 25 April 2018 00:30

Today marks the 10th anniversary of 8000ers.com. To be honest, the situation is critical. The work increased a lot and there is still not enough income just to survive. We want to publish many research results and a huge amount of updated tables, but first the website must be renewed and this is not possible without the help from the people, who are still interested. A fund, private or company sponsoring or at least enough donations would be helpful.

Last year I asked nearly the same and published an Everest nations table with all important information, but nearly nobody donated.

The new Everest nations table is still not complete, but I will post an Everest daily table including changes to former years.

If there is no existence saving support in the near future, a large part of the High Asian chronicles is highly endagered.

Everest Daily to 2017

<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Page 2 of 28