1982年登顶报告
AAC Publications - http://publications.americanalpineclub.org
Gongga Shan—Minya Konka Revisited
Gongga Shan— Minya Konka Revisited
Douglas Kelley and Joseph E. Murphy
ON OCTOBER 3, 1982 Dana Coffield and Douglas Kelley reached the summit of Gongga Shan, a 24,891-foot peak in western Sichuan province of the People’s Republic of China. Fifty years earlier two other Americans, Richard Burdsall and Terris Moore made the first ascent of the mountain, then called Minya Konka. In the intervening years savage weather and avalanche combined to defeat six of nine expeditions to the peak, and more lives were lost attempting the mountain than had made it to the summit.
The 1932 expedition was a remarkable achievement. It sailed from Boston at the height of the depression, spent two months at sea, and docked at Shanghai as the Japanese began shelling the city. There the expedition split; four members continued, travelling fifteen hundred miles up the Yangtse river to find a mountain whose height and location were unknown. Theodore Roosevelt’s sons had seen the mountain from considerable distance while searching for pandas and reported that it was higher than Everest. Moore’s party found the peak, surveyed it, and after 27 days reached the summit by the northwest ridge. For a quarter century thereafter, Minya Konka remained the highest summit reached by Americans.
In 1957 the Chinese in launching their first major mountaineering expedition selected Minya Konka, which they renamed Gongga Shan. Gongga was the logical choice because it is one of China’s four sacred mountains and the highest peak in China proper. They picked the northwest ridge as their route. It was a massive effort with twenty-one Chinese climbers, an equal number of scientists, and a large support group. The team made the attempt under the leadership of Shi Zhan Chun who later led the successful Chinese Everest expedition. Thirteen climbers were caught in an avalanche on the snow chute below Camp I. Many were injured, but only one perished. Six members of the team reached the top and of these three died while descending the summit ridge.
When the Chinese opened eight peaks to foreigners in 1980, the first expeditions1 allowed to return to Gongga were American. One American expedition attempted a new route up the south face. The team was led by Andy Harvard and included Henry Barber, Lou Reichardt, and Jed Williamson. The other expedition sought to repeat the northwest ridge. Four members, Yvon Chouinard, Rick Ridgeway, Kim Schmitz and ABC cameraman Jonathan Wright were caught in an avalanche just above Camp I and swept down fifteen hundred feet. Wright died in the fall and was buried on the mountain.
In 1981 a Swiss expedition was to attempt the peak from the southeast, via the Hailoko Glacier, and a Japanese expedition tried the northeast ridge.2 The Swiss were turned by bad weather to other peaks. One Japanese fell when 100 meters from the summit. The other seven in the summit party retreated, but they too pitched down the north face and were killed.
In the Spring of 1982, Japanese, Swiss and Canadian expeditions3 attempted the peak. The Canadians tried the original route, but were turned back at Camp I by an accident and unfortunate weather. The Japanese approached the mountain from the east, placed two men within 300 meters of the summit, but then retreated in the face of storms. After one member perished from exposure, the other staggered into Base Camp and discovered that his teammates had abandoned him. He survived a nineteen-day ordeal but later lost his fingers and feet from frostbite. Three Swiss climbers attained the summit, reaching the northwest ridge from the east, but one slipped descending the summit ridge and died. The experience of the prior expeditions caused us to approach our preparations with great caution.
Our expedition was initiated by Ned Andrews and Doug Kelley who had met in Peru on separate expeditions in 1979. In 1980 we applied for permission to attempt the mountain by the northwest ridge and were granted a permit for the fall of 1982. Joe Murphy flew to Beijing in February 1981 to complete the arrangements and sign the protocol. The party consisted of seven Americans: Joe Murphy, leader, Ned Andrews, deputy leader, Sharon Caulfield, Dana Coffield, Barbara Kelley, Doug Kelley, and Michael Lehner, and two Chinese, Mr. Wong, liaison officer, and Mr. Liu, interpreter.
On the advice of the Chinese we planned a two-month expedition to allow sufficient time for the attempt. We knew that the Canadians had but two good days in eighteen in the spring of 1982. The Swiss, a year earlier, had seen but four fair days in fifty. The Swiss geologist Imhof had predicted bad weather in September and early October. We knew that our prospects would depend on favorable weather.
We arrived in Beijing on September 3, reached Chendu 1200 miles to the southwest by train on the 9th after a stop in Xian to see the archaeological site, and made the end of the road at Liu Baxiang by minibus on the 13th. From here horses carried our equipment, but to minimize expenses we planned not to use porters. After crossing a 15,200-foot pass, the Tsemei La, we arrived at the Gongga Gompa Lamasery at 12,600 feet on September 16 where we established Base Camp. We were still in the grip of the monsoon which had brought daily rain since the first of September. On arrival at the lamasery Michael Lehner became violently ill with dysentery.
On September 17 we began carrying loads to Advanced Base Camp located at 14,500 feet, five miles away in a meadow just below the northwest ridge. The route descended 300 feet from the lamasery to the Little Gomba River valley and then followed the river to the meadow. The carry was long and arduous because it involved crossing the river several times. Over the next three days we carried thirteen loads to Advanced Base. Because of the difficulty that past parties had in establishing Camp I and uncertain weather, we felt it important to commence exploration of the route to Camp I as soon as possible. At a team meeting on the 18th Murphy designated Coffield and D. Kelley as the lead team, and himself and Lehner as the second team.
Kelley and Coffield moved to Advanced Base Camp on September 19 and immediately began exploring the route to Camp I. Although not technically difficult, the route from Advanced Base to the ridge was objectively the most dangerous area on the mountain. All the previously reported avalanches had occurred in the afternoon. Kelley and Coffield decided that they would only travel on the snow from dawn to 9:30 A.M., the time the morning sun hit the slope. The traditional route followed a snowfield to the right of a rock pyramid. The Canadians got mired down when they tried to avoid the snow and stay on the rock. We found a couloir between the two which, despite continuing rockfall, remained free of avalanche danger except while climbing the rock band and traversing the lower part of the snowfield on the way to the couloir. We relied primarily on that route thereafter. On the afternoon of the 23rd, Coffield and Kelley moved to a temporary camp at 16,200 feet, just below the rock band to avoid the tiresome three-A.M. starts. They arrived just in time to watch an avalanche sweep over their previous day’s route across the rock band. It was an ominous sign. The following day they moved to Camp I at 18,000 feet.
Camp II was established on the ridge at 19,800 feet on September 26. Kelley and Coffield were confined to the snow cave they had dug in an indentation in the ridge line for the next three days by 60 to 80 m.p.h. winds which blew northwest along the ridge. Murphy and Lehner broke through to Camp II on the 29th and spent a night in a tent next to the snow cave. The winds were so high they blew Murphy’s pack off the ridge, and so Murphy and Lehner returned to Advanced Base Camp to obtain replacement equipment for the former and additional high-altitude provisions.
On September 30 Coffield and Kelley proceeded up the broad, gentle ridge against high winds in low visibility carrying provisions to Camp III. The camp was placed at 20,800 feet to the north of a three hundred-foot bulge in the ridge called the “Hump”. The Hump was the major technical obstacle of the climb, extremely steep on the west, nearly as steep and avalanche prone on the east. It would have to be renegotiated on the descent from the summit ridge.
They spent a sleepless night on October 1, holding the tent down in gale-force winds. A foot of snow fell during the night, but the next morning was clear and windless. Coffield led around the east side of the Hump but retreated because the slope was avalanche prone. They then found a crevasse which sloped diagonally upward for two-and-a-half pitches to the crest of the Hump. From that point they descended three hundred feet to the narrow, corniced ridge between the Hump and the main summit ridge. They continued up the ridge onto the east face, against high winds, and pitched Camp IV in a diagonal crevasse at 22,000 feet. The campsite gave protection from avalanches but was difficult to find on the descent.
On October 3 Coffield and Kelley left for the summit at seven A.M. on a bright, clear, almost windless day. They ascended the ridge on firm snow until blocked by weirdly shaped snow gendarmes a thousand feet below the summit. They traversed east across snow-encrusted rock in deterioriating weather. Beyond the maze of snow formations, they front-pointed 150 feet to the northeast face which led to the summit. They attained the summit at 4:30 P.M. in low visibility and began the descent at five P.M. They arrived at Camp IV after several hours in darkness, in a driving snowstorm, replete with thunder and lightning.
The next day they retraced their steps to Camp II. The reascent of the Hump was treacherous due to a foot of new snow and whiteout conditions. Michael Lehner greeted them at Camp II where he had spent two nights waiting for them in a bivouac sack after carrying a load of provisions from Camp I. Gongga was not to release them easily and they received yet another night of snow. After another agonizing decision about avalanche conditions between Camp II and Camp I, the three returned to Advanced Base without mishap on October 5.
In the following week we climbed two additional peaks northwest of Advanced Base. On October 6 Andrews and Caulfield attempted Nochma but were turned back by adverse weather. Andrews and Murphy made the first ascent of Nochma (18,790 feet) by the southeast ridge on October 8, and two days later Coffield, D. Kelley, B. Kelley and Lehner made the second ascent. On October 12 Coffield and Lehner made the first ascent of Gomba (18,840 feet) by the south ridge; Andrews and Murphy made the second ascent on October 13.
Summary of Statistics:
Area: Sichuan Province, People’s Republic of China.
Ascents: Gongga Shan (Minya Konka), 7587 meters, 24,891 feet, fourth ascent, via Northwest Ridge, October 3, 1982 (Coffield, D. Kelley). Nochma, 5727 meters, 18,790 feet, First ascent, via Southeast Ridge, October 8, 1982 (Andrews, Murphy); October 10, 1982 (Coffield, B. Kelley, D. Kelley, Lehner).
Gomba, 5755 meters, 18,840 feet, first ascent, via South Ridge, October 12, 1982 (Coffield, Lehner); October 13, 1982 (Andrews, Murphy).
Personnel: Joseph E. Murphy, leader, Edmund D. Andrews, Dana Coffield, Sharon Caulfield, Barbara Kelley, Douglas A. Kelley, Michael C. Lehner; Mr. Wong, liaison officer, Mr. Liu, interpreter.
1 See A.A.J., 1981, pages 309 to 315.
2 See A.A.J., 1982, pages 383 to 385.
3 See “Climbs and Expeditions” section of this Journal.
本帖最后由 096 于 2015-1-7 17:18 编辑
Alpine climbs in China by Simon Gietl, Daniel Tavernini and Vittorio Messini
19.11.2014 by Planetmountain
[p=18, null, left]
In October 2014 Simon Gietl, Daniel Tavernini and Vittorio Messini carried out a series of alpine ascents in the Minya Konka massif, Sichuan, China.[p=18, null, left]Acting on information from a 2012 German Alpine Club Youth expedition, this autumn Simon Gietl and Daniel Tavernini from Italy's South Tyrol and Vittorio Messini from Austria's East Tyrol teamed up to explore the Minya Konka massif in China's Sichuan region. The trio set off on 6 October from Munich to Chengdu and then Kiangding, from where their gear was transported with the help of 14 donkeys to base camp at 4000m.
[p=18, null, left]The first objective was Little Konka, the 5928 high peak that dominates the valley. After some slight acclimatisation problems the trio set off on 17 October and established advanced base camp at 4600m. They departed at 4:00 the next morning and started up the NW face, through deep snow and against high winds and roped up on steeper sections to reach the summit at 13:00. After the obligatory summit photos they descended via the line of ascent to ABC. During the ascent they came across three belays and according to their research, these may have belonged to a Korean expedition that climbed the West Face, further to the right therefore, before abseiling down the more inviting NW Face climbed by the Tyroleans. Regardless of this (important) detail, the trio returned to BC the next morning and celebrated their successful ascent.
[p=18, null, left]The alpinists then set their sights on the expedition's main objective, the 800m high granite pillar called Stiffler's Mum attempted in 2010 by a French expedition. After climbing the first 4 pitches further to the right of the line chosen by the Frenchmen, the trio were pinned down by good but freezing conditions and were forced to abandon the attempt. The weather remained stable but cold and they quickly switched objectives to climb the striking needle located between Stiffler's Mum and Melcyr Shan. The first six pitches had been climbed in 2012 by the German Youth expedition and Gietl, Tavernini and Messini climbed past thin, steep ice and then perfect granite to reach the 5860 m summit, which they have named Tirol Shan.
[p=18, null, left]Simon Gietl told planetmountain "I'd never been to China before and was extremely curious to discover for myself, especially after all I'd heard from the German team. And I wasn't disappointed. The logistics are fairly straightforward, the mountains stunning, the climbing is great and the potential is absolutely enormous. II'll certainly return in the near future."
Minya Konka, Sichuan, China
Photo by © Simon Gietl, Daniel Tavernini, Vittorio Messini
Climbing Tirol Shan
11年来无人敢上贡嘎 12米冰坡吓退西班牙勇士
2013年11月01日
西班牙登山队攀登贡嘎山路线图
.....
有钱可上珠穆朗玛 有再多钱也难登贡嘎神山
华西都市报:本周三，一支西班牙登山队从贡嘎山铩羽而归，尽管未能成功登顶，但他们却是11年来，唯一敢于挑战贡嘎的登山者。担任此次登山联络官的傅建军昨天介绍：“一个近70度的12米冰坡，拦住了他们的去路，冰坡一侧是深约200米的深谷，加上天气变化不定，队伍只能下撤。”
花钱可以上珠峰，但上不了贡嘎山。在登山死亡率排名中，除了排名第一的处女峰梅里雪山外，排名第二的就是同样以高死亡率著称的贡嘎山。最近一次成功登顶贡嘎山的登山行动要追溯到2002年，当时一支法国10人登山队历经艰险，最终仅一名队员登顶成功。
下马威
8小时才走到大本营
10月9日，一支6人登山团队，在四川省登山协会联络官傅建军带领下，抵达贡嘎山西面的上木居。他们的目标，是海拔7556米的贡嘎山。尽管贡嘎山主峰仅是排名世界第32位的高峰，但因它恐怖的死亡率，让登山者们充满敬畏。
这支登山队伍中的登山者，有医生、植物学家、专业登山向导等，尽管来自不同职业，但他们均有多年的登山经验，多人曾多次攀登过珠峰。如：队伍中唯一的一位女性玛利亚，是一名医生，有2次成功登顶珠峰的成绩。
然而，这支队伍刚一上山，就遭遇到贡嘎山的“下马威”。
按照计划，登山队应该在10月11日抵达4380米的大本营。当天，当队伍从贡嘎山下的贡嘎寺（海拔3700米）出发前往大本营时，就不停被湍急的山涧溪流阻挡。由于水流速度较快，队员们每当遇到流水，只能紧贴着马匹，让马匹在流水的上方充当屏障。傅建军说：“路太难走，从贡嘎寺到大本营，正常四五个小时的路，我们走了8个小时，太艰难。”
此后数天，贡嘎山的天气阴晴不定，时而大雾，时而大雪冰雹。
到了16日，一直困守在大本营的登山队，才顺利将食品运送到海拔5300米的C1营地，但当天却发生意外，一名西班牙队员被落石碎块击中头部和腰部。幸亏这名队员仅受了轻伤，大家虚惊一场。随后几天，登山队一直等待老天开恩放晴。
拦路虎
70度冰坡难以逾越
20日，贡嘎山开始放晴。抓住这一有利时机，西班牙登山队顺利抵达海拔5300米的C1营地。
不过，从C1到C2营地，随着海拔上升，登山难度也开始显著增加。21日，当登山队派出向导，寻找前往C2营地线路时，向导在一面长约12米的冰坡下受阻，难以继续前行。这面冰坡坡度极陡，几乎达到70度，向导企图寻找其他线路绕过冰坡，但很快发现，要想继续前行，必须攀过这座冰坡，没有其他线路可选。更令人胆战心惊的是，冰坡的一侧就是悬崖，崖下是一条深约200米左右的山谷，完全没有迂回空间。
贡嘎山主峰共有4个山脊，而西班牙登山队选择的西北山脊，是一条最为成熟的传统线路。走这条线路，海拔6200米的C2营地，就应该建在冰坡顶上远端的一个驼峰山凹内，而冰坡也是这条线路唯一的通道。但要挑战这个12米的冰坡，登山者必须要有足够的勇气面对200米深谷，因为这里很容易出现滑坠，一旦发生意外，登山者难以自救。
滑坠是贡嘎山遇难者遭遇最多的意外。贡嘎山最近的一次山难，发生在1998年，当时一名韩国登山者正是因遭遇滑坠而遇难。
傅建军介绍说：“我们通过望远镜观察，发现向导几次努力，企图绕开冰坡，最终都以失败告终。直接向冰坡发起挑战，似乎也没有找到合适的办法攀登上坡。要攀登上这一冰坡，不仅需要冰橇、路绳，同时也考验登山者的技术能力。”
向导回到营地后，大家决定继续寻找机会。但从22日开始，天气又再次出现不稳定变化，大雾、冰雹交替出现。24日，眼见天气没有好转迹象，登山队终于做出艰难决定：“下撤！”当天下午6点，登山队返回大本营。
缺手续
改登拉玛峰被制止
返回大本营后，郁闷的西班牙登山队员打算改而尝试攀登贡嘎山主峰边上的拉玛峰。虽然拉玛峰只有5580米，但属于技术性山峰，具有一定难度。然而，面对这一更改的计划，联络官傅建军当即予以了制止。他说：“按照有关法规，外国人登山更改山峰，必须先申报，并且要获得批准后才能登。”
省登山协会副秘书长高敏介绍：“法律的这一规定，一方面是国家安全的需要，同时也是出于对登山者保护的需要。一旦登山者遭遇意外，我们可以根据他们的申报线路予以寻找。”
西班牙人却不死心，他们表示：“贡嘎山没成功，我们可以选择去其他山峰。”对于西班牙登山者的失利，傅建军表示可以理解，但他明确表示：“攀登贡嘎山本来就是一件非常艰难的挑战，不仅要看登山者的运气（主要是天气因素），还要看登山者的装备和技术能力。”而对于没有办理合法手续的更换登山目标，他坚决表示不同意。在傅建军的坚持下，西班牙登山队最终放弃了拉玛峰的攀登计划，于30日撤退回到成都。
傅建军昨天透露说：“他们此次失利，除了有天气原因外，还有心理和装备的问题。比如，有的登山者攀登贡嘎山，路绳就要携带2千多米，而他们仅带了200米左右。即便上了冰坡，后面的线路也很难有保障。”专家解读>>>
贡嘎太难 比珠穆朗玛峰还难
珠穆朗玛和贡嘎，是国际登山界极富盛名的两座山峰。但近年来，这两座山峰出现一山暴热一山暴冷，冰火两重天的现象。
今年5月，一张珠峰“堵车”的图片，让世界看到了珠峰的火爆。据登山专家介绍：“珠峰之所以火爆，与现在成熟的商业登山开发息息相关。”
所谓商业登山，是指登山客户支付一笔费用给探险公司，由探险公司负责高山上的服务，包括物资运输、危险线路的安全保障等，在向导的细心呵护下，登山者只需跟随前行，也就是“能力不足金钱补”。有人甚至开玩笑说：“请几个夏尔巴人，拖也会把你拖上珠峰。”
而贡嘎山则不同。从2002年的11年来，西班牙登山队是唯一的一支挑战贡嘎的队伍。此山之所以如此被冷遇，与它的难度直接相关。
据统计，贡嘎山迄今仅有24人成功登顶，却有37人在攀登中和登顶后遇难（死亡率64.8%）。登山死亡率远远超过珠峰的14％和乔戈里峰的30％，仅次于梅里雪山（处女峰，至今无人登顶）。攀登贡嘎山最惨重的一次山难，发生在1981年，当时一支日本12人的登山队，有8人遇难（主要是滑坠）。
登山专家指出，贡嘎山死亡率居高不下有几大原因，一是气候变幻莫测，二是山脊陡峭风大，容易出现滑坠。而贡嘎山的登山线路，大多在山脊上，因此相当危险。
正是由于危险性太高，贡嘎山根本无法进行商业登山。权威支招>>>登贡嘎山好天**丶
