{"id":13445,"date":"2013-02-27T08:04:53","date_gmt":"2013-02-27T15:04:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/?p=13445"},"modified":"2016-05-27T17:17:22","modified_gmt":"2016-05-27T23:17:22","slug":"everest-2013-the-continuing-search-for-malloy-irvines-camera","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/2013\/02\/27\/everest-2013-the-continuing-search-for-malloy-irvines-camera\/","title":{"rendered":"Everest 2013: The Continuing Search for Mallory & Irvine’s Camera"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"mallorycamera-300x224\"<\/p>\n

Who were the first climbers to summit Everest continues to be a mystery that enthralls Everest followers and borders on obsession for a few historians.<\/p>\n

The key question that remains is; can it be proven that George Mallory and Sandy Irvine summited Mt. Everest in 1924, or not? You see, <\/a> Mallory’s body has been found but not Sandy Irvine, view<\/a> and he had a camera.<\/p>\n

Without proof, the world will always accept that Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay were the first to summit in 1953, 29 years later.<\/p>\n

Everest Historian Tom Holzel, has new data on where Irvine, and perhaps the camera, might be found and is looking for partners to solve the mystery once and for all.<\/p>\n

Before we take a look at this effort, a tiny bit of background of the north.<\/p>\n

The north side of Everest is steeped in history with multiple attempts throughout the 1920?s. The first attempt was by a British team in 1921 when Mallory led a small team becoming the first known human to set foot on the mountain’s flanks by climbing up to the North Col (7003m).\u00a0 The second expedition in 1922 reached 27,300? before turning back, and was the first team to use supplemental oxygen – an unknown tool at that time.<\/p>\n

But it was the 1924 Mallory and Irvine effort that was most notable as a climber was sighted on the high summit ridge but then disappeared.\u00a0 Mallory\u2019s body was found in 1999 but there was no proof that he died going up or coming down thus the importance of finding the camera and potential photos of a summit.<\/p>\n

The first summit of Everest from Tibet was by a Chinese team on May 25, 1960.\u00a0 Nawang Gombu (Tibetan) and Chinese Chu Yin-Hau and Wang Fu-zhou, who is said to have climbed the Second Step in his sock feet, claimed the honor.<\/p>\n

However without a summit photo, many doubted the summit claim. In 1975, a successful summit was again claimed by the Chinese when the ladder on the Second Step was installed.<\/p>\n

With the mystery of who was first dominating Everest gossip for almost a century, teams have looked in vain for positive proof of a 1924 summit. There have been valiant efforts and vague clues throughout the years.<\/p>\n

In 1933, Irvine\u2019s wooden ice axe was found in the fall line of the climber\u2019s last known route. A Chinese porter reported seeing an \u201can english dead\u201d in 1960 but there were no pictures.<\/p>\n

Then in 1999, a team led by IMG founder Eric Simonson conducted a serious search. Conrad Anker found Mallory\u2019s body on the north side below the Chinese reported location. Neither Irvine\u2019s body nor the camera was located. Simonson returned in 2001 to look for the camera, without success. It was the classic needle in the haystack search complicated by snow cover.<\/p>\n

While the discovery of Mallory\u2019s body created excitement throughout the climbing world, it did not provide any evidence of a summit. In fact it just fueled the speculation. One of the members of that 1999 expedition, Jake Norton wrote a very interesting view on the summit question on his blog<\/a> in 2010 making the case that they did summit.<\/p>\n

But no one knows for sure and the camera might be able to close the case.<\/p>\n

Tom Holzel, who conducted a thwarted search expedition in 1986, took a new approach to locating the camera using two images; one from a photo taken in 1933 and another taken in 1984 from a SwissPhoto, AG, Learjet flying over Everest. This last image was very high-resolution.<\/p>\n

Holzel used imaging technology to compare the photographs and discovered that the location of an ice ax marking a certain fall of the two climbers, was misplaced by 60 yards. Everyone was looking in the wrong place! Following the new line, he identified what he calls an \u201coblong blob\u201d. The blob is near where the Chinese porter reported his sighting in 1975.<\/p>\n

Holzel strongly believes this is Irvine who is thought to have been carrying the Vest Pocket Kodak camera when he and Mallory disappeared.<\/p>\n

Now Holzel wants to be certain by taking a new image with another flyover using the latest advancements in photography, but he needs $10,000. Once he proves the location of Irvine, he wants to continue the search with a small team that would include Thom Pollard and Jake Norton of the 1999 expedition.<\/p>\n

Kodak Scientists have consulted with them on the project so if they find the camera, they have processes on how to handle it to prevent further damage.<\/p>\n

Tom was kind enough to do yet another interview with me. Mind you, he has been interviewed extensively and asked almost every question imaginable so we explored his latest thoughts and case for the flyover.<\/p>\n

\n

AA: Tom, you\u2019ve been after the Mallory & Irvine (M&I) mystery for quite a while now.\u00a0 And general opinion of what really happened to them is still all over the map. Are we any closer to finding out how far they actually got?<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: I think so, but the conclusion we are being driven to is not what most Mallory &Irvine fans want to hear\u2014and I\u2019m the one at fault.\u00a0 In 1971 in Mountain Magazine #17\u00a0 I did an analysis of all the known climbs on Mt Everest\u201469 segments in all\u2014to plot how much of a difference the use of oxygen made on climbing speed. And because M & I were using oxygen, it looked to me like their chances of success had been grossly underestimated. The pre WW-II British leaders thought any theoretical advantage was nullified by the added weight. The chart showed a marked speed advantage for using oxygen.<\/p>\n

AA: And how were those calculations used?<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: It let us estimate how fast M & I would have climbed on June 6th. However, it also showed a dramatic drop in climbing speed the higher one went\u2014which was an unknown factor\u00a0 to the pre-WW-II British climbers. So M & I weren\u2019t aware of it either.<\/p>\n

AA:\u00a0 They climbed slower as they went higher even with oxygen. What does this prove?
<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: It tells us several things. First, it tells us why Mallory wrote to Photographer John Noel to be on the look-out for them near the Second Step by as early as 8am. It\u2019s not because he was going to get up a 3 in the morning; rather, he must have extrapolated from their rapid climb up from the North Col to C-6 using only \u00be of a single tank of gas each, or 3 hours, to achieve a gain of 3700 vertical feet. That\u2019s really stoking, but in the same ball park as Finch and Bruce climbed the same terrain in 1922 also using oxygen.<\/p>\n

When Eric Simonson found one of the 1924 bottles, we learned that they \u201conly\u201d achieved at climb rate of 275 ft\/hr. Excellent time, by the way, but way less than they had assumed they would achieve based on their previous two days. Even had Mallory extrapolated that speed, he would have realized that the climb to the summit from the First Step\u2014another 1000 vertical feet with the three hours of gas they had remaining was out of the cards for the both of them.<\/p>\n

AA: Is that where you got the idea that Mallory might have taken Irvine\u2019s remaining oxygen?<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: Right. It solved two major problems. The climb up to the First Step is a slog but technically easy. You put one foot in front of the other. After that you have a tough choice: attack the traverse to the Second Step and the Step itself with its horrendous exposure and lack of protection, or sidle out along the treacherously slippery down-sloping tiles of the Great Couloir route. Mallory might have felt he could do it, but he knew that dragging Irvine along was an unacceptable escalation of the risk to them both.<\/p>\n

AA: I would think Mallory might just send Irvine back and continue alone using the available oxygen for himself.<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: Not quite.\u00a0 I think he did exactly what Norton and Somervell did a few days earlier: Somervell sat down and waited to see how far Norton could get up the Great Couloir. When exhaustion slowed Norton to a crawl, he turned back and they descended more or less together.<\/p>\n

AA: So when Mallory gave up and came back to pick-up Irvine,\u00a0 this is where you have the two climbing the First Step?<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: Yes. Except that Jim Wickwire makes the excellent point that two climbers coming down from a grueling effort would never make a such strenuous detour. And he\u2019s right. But we know that at least one person did climb the step. Odell saw that clearly. That\u2019s what gave me the idea of Mallory continuing\u2014probably via the Norton Route into the Great Couloir– while Irvine rested. When Mallory got back from his failed effort to breech the Second Step escarpment, he was by then thoroughly exhausted. But not Irvine.<\/p>\n

Irvine, who had been waiting around, suggested they climb to the top of the First Step to at least get some\u00a0 photographs of the NE Ridge up to and beyond the Second Step. Mallory followed along and the two were spotted crossing the flat snowy patch at the base of the step by Odell. But Mallory gave up and let Irvine clamber to the top. That\u2019s who Odell saw break skyline\u2014only one person\u2014and\u00a0 I\u2019m suggesting that was Irvine. Then Irvine climbed down and the two began a routine return to C-6\u2014when they were hit by a fierce snow squall.<\/p>\n

AA:\u00a0 Now you claim to have discovered Irvine\u2019s exact\u00a0 location. A lot of other climbers believed they knew where Irvine must lie\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: \u2026but none of those locations have panned out. So let\u2019s someone try my location.<\/p>\n

AA: Which is where? And what\u2019s your evidence?<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: My evidence is still circumstantial. Strongly circumstantial, but the aerial photographs we analyzed do not have the resolution in the shadows where I claim Irvine lies to resolve a human body.<\/p>\n

AA: And that evidence is?<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: First, we know an accident occurred where the ice ax was found in 1933. Suggestions that the ice ax was put down when they still had a major snow field to climb is simply the most far-out excuse to try to put them on top. No one in climbing history has ever left his ice ax behind for any reason. Thus, it marks the point of an accident and the likelihood is that evidence of the accident might still be near-by.<\/p>\n

AA: But Mallory was discovered 300m lower down from the ice axe, so something else must have happened.<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: Mallory got down there somehow. Climbing down through the Yellow Band in a fierce snow squall with broken ribs is no mean feat. But his luck ran out when he tried to glissade down the 8200m Snow Field. At first the snowpack was deep enough for him to modulate his speed with his ice ax. But then he came over lightly snow-covered rocks farther down. The adz kicked back, the pick struck him in the forehead above his right eye. No, \u201cstruck\u201d is too mild a word\u2014drove it with the force of a hurled lance.<\/p>\n

But we know that Irvine didn\u2019t fall with Mallory. We know that because, secondly, two other climbers spotted a body in the Yellow Band\u2014Xu Jing in 1960 and Sherpa Dorji Chhiring in 1995. Both were near the end of an exhausting climb without oxygen and neither had any clear idea of where in the Yellow Band they climbed down. Hemmleb and Simonson first learned of Xu\u2019s sighting, in 2001 but his description of location was varied and muddled by poor translation.<\/p>\n

AA: But aren\u2019t there lots of bodies on the North Face?<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: Nowadays, yes. But none at all in 1960. And none in the Yellow Band in 1995.<\/p>\n

What was not muddled was Xu\u2019s description of the body and its lie, and a description of what Xu\u2019s decision-making process was on his non-standard descent. Xu said when he turned down, instead of following the standard 1924-33 path (which the 1960 Chinese also took), he \u201ctook a more direct route.\u201d<\/p>\n

Well, when you examine the aerial photographs it is very clear what the standard route is, and the fork that looks (and is) \u201cmore direct.\u201d So I assume that when Irvine had to continue on, he would have continued on the route they ascended by\u2014the standard route. But Xu explicitly didn\u2019t take that route; he turned off it at a fork just at the ice ax site that dropped quicker and then parallels the standard route some 40m lower down.<\/p>\n

The aerial photograph shows a \u201cred slash\u201d\u2014a rock slot 20m below the standard route and right at the turn of Xu\u2019s descent\u2014only 50 feet away. Most importantly, the location is to Xu\u2019s right\u2014as he said. Chhiring also descended from the First Step, and also didn\u2019t really know the route. So, like Xu, he must have chosen what to him also appeared to be \u201cthe more direct route.\u201d<\/p>\n

Instead of being a vertical slot, like most of the cracks are, the \u201cRed Slash\u201d runs diagonally. This fits Xu\u2019s description of \u201cthe unfortunate\u201d that his feet pointed toward the summit.<\/p>\n

AA:\u00a0 So you\u2019ve assembled\u00a0 quite a few clues, all seemingly pointing to the same spot. You\u2019ve had this information on your website, velocitypress.com, a couple of years now. Why hasn\u2019t anyone gone to your location yet?<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: I\u2019ve tried to raise money for a simple search expedition. I got the BBC interested to partially fund a search, as well as a few other partial sponsors. But always too little, too late. The big boys, having been bitten a few times by dry holes now want absolute proof of the body\u2019s location before funding a genuine look-see.<\/p>\n

AA: So the dream continues but now based on solid imagery. The only thing lacking are funds for a flyover to photograph the exact spot, then the expedition.<\/strong><\/p>\n

TH: Yes, this is now serious history, and science. It would be a shame not to follow every lead. We are short about $10K to fund the flyover. With the latest telephoto technology, we might be able to make a major step in the search. The alternative is another expedition costing around $100K.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Best of luck Tom in finding funding for this new flyover and eventually solving the mystery once and for all. You can read much more on Tom’s website, velocitypress.com<\/p>\n

Climb On!
Alan
Memories are Everything<\/p>\n

\n

[poll id=”6″]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Who were the first climbers to summit Everest continues to be a mystery that enthralls Everest followers and borders on obsession for […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"dois","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"_wpas_customize_per_network":false},"categories":[147,214],"tags":[448,455,232,230,231],"class_list":["post-13445","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-everest","category-everest-2013-coverage","tag-everest","tag-everest-2013-coverage","tag-kodak-camera","tag-mallory-irvine","tag-tom-holzel"],"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13445","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13445"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13445\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13445"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13445"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.alanarnette.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13445"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}