It's such an extreme environment. You can't really rescue people who are in trouble. At best, with multiple climbers, you can have someone else tell you that you shouldn't proceed, which might save your life.
But if someone is already in trouble, you can't really help out, or you will die too. Sure, if you have an extra energy bar, you can give that to your buddy, but that's about it.
The Times just had an interesting feature on Everest body recovery: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/18/sports/everes...
Although the main theme of the article is about the recovery of a body from near the summit, it has background information on when climbs can take place, and how the route to the summit is established every year.
IMO, it's a worthwhile read!
> Delsalle used a virtually standard version of the Eurocopter AS350 Squirrel B3, only removing unnecessary elements, such as passenger seats, to reduce the standard weight by 120 kg (265 lb) and thus extend the 1-hour fuel range.
And in any case, I believe the user you responded to was talking about rescues, not removing corpses.
Passenger jets are fine up there because they haul ass, often north of Mach 0.7-0.8, and push as much of the thin air as possible over the wing. (One of the cool things about commercial air travel is that most people don’t realize they’re flying at transonic speeds, but you’ll occasionally see evidence of it in flight.) It doesn’t take much slowing down for a passenger jet to start descending, and ultimately stall, at cruising altitude. The flight envelope at Everest altitude is much smaller than you’d expect.
For a helicopter, you’d need to replicate that set of circumstances, but with wings rotating above you instead. One has to worry about other conditions, too: in the '70s, when Boulet set the helicopter altitude record above 40,000, the engine flamed out on account of how cold it was and wouldn’t restart. High altitude helicopters are a very difficult design problem, and there isn’t much economic demand to solve it.