Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth Science

3-Man Team Begins Ice-Survey Trek To the North Pole 137

Posted by timothy from the counting-the-cubes dept.
Hugh Pickens writes "Satellites have shown how the Arctic sea-ice has been shrinking in recent years, but a three-man scientific team making an expedition to the North Pole should give scientists a better idea of how thin the ice is becoming. 'We're making the surface journey because that's the only way we have of gathering these direct observations of how thick the snow and the ice is,' said team leader Pen Hadow, who in 2003 became the first person to trek solo and without support from Canada to the North Pole. 'That's what the scientists really need to know.' There is more at stake for the British team than achieving some invented personal goal: 'The journey's going to be about 700 miles in distance, taking about three months,' said Hadow. 'In the earlier phases, the temperatures are about minus 50 degrees ... And we're towing sledges with our camping equipment and our survey equipment — almost twice our body weights — for most of the distance.'"
"Arctic ice modeler Wieslaw Maslowski, a science adviser to the survey, hopes the data gathered during the journey will enable him to refine his forecast of when the first ice-free summer might arrive. 'According to our studies, it's very likely that if this current trend of ice decline based on the last decade or so continues, or accelerates, the ice might be almost gone in summer sometime between 2010 and 2016.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

3-Man Team Begins Ice-Survey Trek To the North Pole More

3-Man Team Begins Ice-Survey Trek To the North Pole

Comments Filter:

  • Why walk... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by computersareevil ( 244846 )

    When you can drive? [wikipedia.org] If this is urgent information, shouldn't they use the appropriate means to gather it in about three days instead of three months?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by mackil ( 668039 )
      Exactly what I was going to say! [finalgear.com]
    • When you can sail? [bbc.co.uk]

    • Re:Why walk... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:25PM (#27052221)

      Because if you RTFA, it states that they expect to encounter gaps in the ice.

      If that happens, they expect to have to swim "for up to two hours at a time in darkness", all the time still towing their equipment behind them.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by RingDev ( 879105 )

        Sounds like a job for a DUKW. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DUKW [wikipedia.org]

        -Rick

      • If you had RTFR (Read The Fucking Reference), you would know the Hilux can survive being awash in seawater for hours.

        (Not to mention being set on fire, imploded with a building, and having a caravan dropped on it...)

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Hodar ( 105577 )

        So, they are going to 'swim' in artic water for 2 hours in darkness, while towing their camping gear, food and measurement equipment with them. From the article, they will be carrying 2x their body weight. So, while they are swimming they will be carrying ~300 of dead weight, good thing they are all in great shape and from the planet Krypton. And you don't smell fresh BS?

        What does it take for you to know you are being lied to? How about "after making their measurements, they will then band their Power R

        • Re:Why walk... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Maxime Chaya ( 1491187 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @01:52PM (#27053519)
          It's actually quite possible, since you're pulling not carrying. In Antarctica, during my South Pole expedition, I was pulling over 100 KGs uphill for over 600 nautical miles. Daily energy consumption is around 9000 calories. It's all about pace, not speed. --Maxime Chaya www.TheThreePoles.com [thethreepoles.com]

          • Out of curiosity, what were your meals like? Normal foods (whatever that means in such a climate) with larger portions, lots of energy dense stuff like like almonds and dry fruit, etc?

          • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

            by Hodar ( 105577 )

            I never questioned pulling the weight, nor did I question the distance.

            I question the "Swim in total darkness for 2 hours" statement. Sorry, but no human is going to swim in artic waters for 2 hours and live to tell the tale. Your muscles will lock, and you will drown long before 15 minutes has lapsed, let alone 2 hours. Hence my Power Rangers ring comment - only a fool will believe that a person will carry the weight described, then go for a nice artic swim for 2 hours, and then continue on the trek as

            • Immersion suit. Check it out.
            • Geezzzussss, some people just have to be 'right' no matter what.

              You called the article BS and implied the OP was gullible. You were then corrected by an informative post from someone who has actually done something similar. Continuing to defend your position with all sorts of irrelevant arguments is just plain arrogance.

          • I was pulling over 100 KGs uphill

            "...both ways !!".
            Sorry. Meme reflex.
            Seriously man, what you do is impressive. What's funny is that I read /. post at filter level +4 and, beside the funny comments from regular posters, all the insightful comments in that story are from you.

    • Re:Why walk... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Maxime Chaya ( 1491187 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:34PM (#27052365)
      The ice is not consistently thick enough to support machines of any sort, and open leads in ice (open water cracks) require full submersion of self (in an immersion suit) to cross. This is not a Top Gear episode, this is a real adventure like back in the day, when there were hardened explorers.


      --Maxime Chaya blogging live from the North Pole [thethreepoles.com]--

      • The ice is not consistently thick enough to support machines of any sort

        Nuts [argoatv.com]

        If they want to have an adventure, nothing wrong with that, all for it. But these blokes are suggesting what they are doing can't be done any other way than on an arduous 3-month walking tour, which is hogwash.

        • If you want to collect data from all over the Ice (which is all floating on the Arctic Ocean), you have to use skis and floating sleds...
          Some things, like climbing mountains, and crossing arctic circles, require the versatility of the human body.
          There's no machine that comes even close to doing the number of things we can do, from climbing, to skiing, to swimming, to recharging with a good night's sleep.

          There's no hogwash here, just a reality that we are all too willing to dismiss from the comfort o

      • I suppose you have this documented elsewhere already but, I am curious - Do you have some custom immersion suits that will go on over your dry insulation (coats, pants, etc) ? Or will you be changing into a "regular" suit in sub-zero weather?
        You will be taking flippers to enable you to swim in them (They are not exactly speedo suits)? They are not designed for swimming...
        I think I would take an inflatable watercraft instead but I would worry that the rubber would crack at extreme cold temperatures (out of

      • Sorry but the top gear episode was a 'real adventure'. You are right about the weight and if you watch the episode you will see they had some 'adventure' with that particular problem. The TG crew were the first to drive to the magnetic NP not the geographic NP, overall a much shorter and less risky trip but still an adventure IMHO.
    • As far as I know, the Arctic is a pretty deep ocean, why not survey the ice from the bottom?

    • I thought nuclear subs could wander under the ice cap. Would it be too hard to measure the ice from one? Or is renting a nuke sub just way out of price range?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by elrous0 ( 869638 ) *
      Santa don't like noisy cars. You'd gonna get a lump of coal up your ass for that one.

    • Well, it wouldn't be very prudent to check how thin the ice is with a car, now would it? One might fall through and I can imagine making a cup of hot tea may prove difficult in such environs. I'm not sure I would be able to stand being wet and cold without a cup of Earl Grey in my hands. What a dastardly thought!

    • Because the Magnetic North Pole and the actual North Pole are quite a ways apart, and the conditions only get worse once you pass the latitude of the magnetic pole. The Top Gear folks had a fair bit of trouble getting as far as they did: basically scouting ahead on foot and clearing areas to drive. If you have to scout on foot, you might as well just keep walking.
  • Santa Claus was unavailable for comment.

  • Top Gear has shown it's possible. If the goal is science, not "because we can", not taking three months would be a bonus.

  • Does sattelite data show shrinking ice? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I thought sattelite data showed the area covered by ice had remained quite steady over the last few years? Can someone link to the previous case?

    Also, how will a three man team on the ground gain sensible data on whether the ice is 1 or 2 km thick?

    • Sea ice is measured in meters not kilometers. To drill down a couple of meters is no problem. In addition the photos don't reliably tell you how thick the ice is only how much there is.
    • I'm not sure what the satellites say, but the "old" ice is what is melting. It has been affected by a century of warming and that heat is going all the way to its core. On the other hand, new ice/snow (last 5 years or so) has actually grown in thickness.
      • You certainly don't want to eat the old snow. You shouldn't eat yellow snow either, for that matter.
      • "On the other hand, new ice/snow (last 5 years or so) has actually grown in thickness."

        This has been observed for snow in some specific regions, in particular above 3000ft in Greenland. Interestingly increased snow fall at high altitudes was predicted by the much maligned climate models, unfortunately the prevaling theory is that this will increase the velocity of glaciers.

        I'm not aware of any data or even a theory that suggests increased thickness of sea ice, do you have a link? (not attacking you, j

      • Arctic ice is very dynamic. The vast majority isn't more than a few years old. The problem is that more is disappearing than is being created.
        Indeed it is likely that the arctic will become ice-free in summer in the pretty near future.

    • Parent AC is a climate troll, possibly George Will from the WSJ, but who knows.
  • Why don't they fly out there, measure the ice, fly back? Surely there are long range choppers that can fly more than 700 miles? Oh wait, they are British, that wouldn't be manly enough for them...

    • Re:Leave it to the Brits (Score:5, Funny)

      by PinkyDead ( 862370 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:56PM (#27052711) Journal

      I think these chaps must not be just British, but in fact English.

      Because if they were Welsh they'd fly to the Bahamas, get sunburned, fly back and report "Saw lots of ice. Very cold, very white."

      And if they were Scottish they wouldn't bother because they'd just go to Aberdeen, where it's proper cold.

      • If they were from Newcastle they would go all the way there wearing t-shirts and claiming that only a southern poof would consider it cold.
  • According to the NSIDC, Arctic ice extent is almost back to the 1979-2000 mean (within 1 standard deviation), so I'm not too sure what all the fuss is about. Exclusive: "Scientists go on long walk".

    Polar Ice Trends [wattsupwiththat.com]

    • Re: (Score:1, Redundant)

      by raddan ( 519638 )
      You're talking about the area of the ice. These folks are talking about the depth. You can't know one by knowing the other, although you can guess. This isn't freshman year physics-- real scientists need real data.

    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Wow. That's a serious why to twist around the facts. If you look at the plot [uaf.edu] from your link, you'll see that the minimum sea ice extent is small. This is where the news has been. Anyway, ice volume [nsidc.org] matters more. Notice my article is also from NSIDC and directly contracts the bent in your article on a site dedicated to spreading misinformation about the science behind climate change.

      I strongly doubt you can find an article from NSIDC that agrees with what Watts Up With That? claimed they said, but I
      • Why does ice volume matter more when it's ice surface area that affects albedo, not thickness? i.e. 1ft of ice has just as much albedo and 100ft.

        • Why does ice volume matter? Because thin ice melts away much more quickly than thick ice does.

        • Re:More Climate Change-balls.... (Score:4, Informative)

          by locofungus ( 179280 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @02:19PM (#27053941)

          It's the summer ice extent that matters. It's dark in the winter so any albedo effect is irrelevant.

          The ice melts during the summer. So if you've only got 1ft thick ice then it will melt before the winter freeze restarts. If you've got 100ft thick ice then (in the past) the winter freeze restored the thinning due to the summer melt.

          That's not happening now. You can argue that summer 2007 was a freak year for ice extent. 2008 wasn't, and yet the summer 2008 minimum was barely more than the 2007 minimum.

          That's the problem with single year ice (which also tends to be more salty and so melts at a lower temperature)

          Tim.

    • They are measuring ice thickness, not extent. You can get a rough idea of thickness from satellite radar, but this should give much more accurate numbers (though only for a relatively small part of the ice, of course).

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Burnhard ( 1031106 )
        Submarines have been measuring ice thickness for decades (e.g. HMS Tireless). One of their discoveries was the ice moves about (due to wind), so measuring thickness at one spot today and then again next year is pretty meaningless.
    • Your post raises an interesting question. If these scientists are conducting the first ever survey of its kind, what will they compare the data with? Do they plan on repeating this survey for several years?

  • Live Blogging from the North Pole (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Maxime Chaya ( 1491187 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:27PM (#27052261)
    I'm on my way to the North Pole on a similar expedition, which is starting today. We're taking a twin otter to Eureka, refueling, and then flying out to Ward Hunt Island. We should be on the Ice tonight. The trek (on skis) is about 60 days, the first 10-20 of which are in relative darkness 24/7. We will be towing 160KG sleds that house all our equipment and food for 30 days. The sleds float as the ice oftentimes cracks, and we have to swim across open leads. Last year, I did the same with the South Pole, starting at Hercules Inlet and skiing all the way up to the South Pole. I blogged live from there, and am blogging live on this journey. This will be the last of my 3 poles challenge (Everest, South, North), and is by far the most difficult and dangerous. If we don't contact anyone in 72 hours, planes are sent out to find us - if ever. Check it out at: www.TheThreePoles.com [thethreepoles.com] --Maxime Chaya-- Lebanese Seven Summiteer

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jd ( 1658 )

      The question is whether your blog can survive Slashdot. That would seem a greater challenge still.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by FMZ ( 1178473 )

      Good luck on your expedition Maxime. Other than for research, I'll never understand why people do these things... but I'll also never stop being pleasantly amazed at the power of human tenacity, ingenuity, and bravery.

      Wishing you a safe return.

      • there's an old saying that goes something like: "Why did you climb Everest? Because it was there."

    • Good luck and better skill on your expedition, I'll be following your blog!

    • Iridium Satellite Phone
      HP iPaq PDA
      Ricoh Digital Camera
      Canon G10 Digital Camera
      Solar Power Packs (useless for the first 4 weeks (no sun))
      Lithium Batteries
      12V battery pack


      most of the above must be kept next to my body for wamth as none of it is rated at -60 C

      --Maxime Chaya--

    • Awesome! One question: you say you swim across open leads. What kind of gear do you wear for that? Normally, getting clothes wet is a death sentence in cold weather. Not to mention that actually going for a swim for more than a few minutes is incredibly tough as well...

      • true. actually, if you fall into the water without the immersion suit, you're most likely dead. the water will freeze on contact with air, so you'd become an instant popsicle the minute you step out.
        the immersion suit is much like a diving dry-suit, but bright yellow and more 'plasticky'. you put it on, step into the water, wade to the other side, pull your sled across by rope, and you're out.
        when you get out, you crack the ice off the suit, and then take it off.
        immersion suit training in Minnesota [thethreepoles.com]

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by balbord ( 447248 )

      Bookmarked! :)
      godspeed!

  • Are these guys pain junkies! Why not get choppered there and get dropped of with all your equipment and get picked up when they are done? Dude this is the 21st century! People fly to the Pole for lunch there days.

    • You could make a sonar device that you lower from the chopper, then you don't even have to land...

      The next step, of course would be a drone. When you take the people out, and the air-craft becomes very much more efficient.

      The even more efficient step, would be deploy sensors that send the data to satellites. Deploy them once, they send massive amounts of data for years.

      Efficiency very high ;)

      Sex appeal very low =(

      yep, I'm a geek

  • The crew from Top Gear made it in a Truck, The Toyota Hilex a few years ago... Well, i should say that Clarkson and May made it in the truck... Hammond made it via DogSled.

  • 7.777777777 miles per day (Score:4, Interesting)

    by killmenow ( 184444 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:47PM (#27052559)
    700 miles in three months. ~90 days. They're moving no more than 7.777... miles each day. That's a slow pace. I assume each day will consist largely of:
    1. De-camp: 1-2 hrs
    2. Move: 4-5 hrs
    3. Setup camp: 1-2 hrs
    4. Do science stuff: 3-4 hrs

    That's 9-13 hrs/day. With the rest spent trying not to die.

    Realistically, I would expect them to travel as far as they can in a given day. If they manage 20 miles in a single day, great, they just got a little bit ahead so when bad things happen on those days they barely make 1 mile, they'll still be okay.

    Of course, I could read the article and find out if they address this, but (this being slashdot) I won't.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by LordEd ( 840443 )

      With the rest spent trying not to die.

      That's exactly why I want to see Survivor: Canada. Forget this taking people to survive in a tropical environment. Stick them up on some northern island and see how long before they get eaten by a polar bear.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Cyberia ( 70947 )

      Okay, Let's put this into perspective. They are British? So, let's assume that they are also lugging a few hundred liters of Gin, and don't forget the Earl Grey. How straight and fast can you walk now? huh? Don't forget to add six or so hours for drinking in there.

    • That's probably not a bad average speed for travel on foot, really. I go on extended canoe and kayak trips, and although I've had days where I've covered over fifty miles, most days of travel are only about 25 miles. The average is only about 15-18 miles/day, though. Occasional rest days, bad wind/water days, fishing days, "too much rain" days etc usually make up about 25% of total days. My longest so far is only 40 days, and I think I'd be purposely slowing myself even more so I wouldn't get fatigued f

  • I didn't realize Ann Daniels was a man. Shouldn't the title be "3-person team"?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Zanix ( 684798 )
      According to AskOxford.com [askoxford.com], Man means several things.

      man
      noun (pl. men) 1 an adult human male. 2 a male member of a workforce, team, etc. 3 a husband or lover. 4 a person. 5 human beings in general. 6 a figure or token used in a board game.

      While you are correct in that it is not typically used that way, you'll notice that usage #4 IS Person. So technically 3-man team is an acceptable usage.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by geekoid ( 135745 )

      Royal man.

  • ...whether they find any ice, but whether they find any gin.

  • We didn't listen!
  • You can see it from space, and I don't mean the space between Algore's ears!

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You can see it from space

      I can see the depth of your reading comprehension from right here!

      Don't you have something better to do than whine about scientists going out and actually taking measurements instead of using models and guessing?

  • This is just a publicity stunt. If you sent a nuclear submarine with a top mounted sonar, you could put together a very detailed picture of the underside of the ice and fairly quickly. In fact, given the tendency of major powers to hide their ballistic submarines under the ice, I'd be shocked if those maps didn't exist already.

  • Why don't they use an amphibious vehicle, powered by a diesel engine?

  • The Top Gear team was able to make it to the north pole in a large Jeep. And they needed way less than 3 months. They had one guy with a dog sled, and two with the Jeep. The dog sled had obviously huge deficits.

    And hell, take a big tank of fuel with you, and use a helicopter. Or something else that can land vertically.

    Some people just make it harder to themselves than they have to.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Close