[Home][Scroll down to ALPHABETICAL INDEX for topics]


Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Quick Google-maps video tour of about 27 of 80 claimed research stations with map correlation

The following video claims that there are 80 stations. I'll have to look at the Wikipedia entry on stations again as well as other maps. The concept of the video is interesting-- I've posted it in this blog before. Today, however, I have a better understanding of the various stations and travel between them as well as fuel depots, GPS stations, and other aspects of Antarctica so it's interesting to revisit this approach.

Below the video is the first map I chose to correlate what is shown in the video with the standard map of Antarctica's research stations with clear latitude and longitude lines. As the video plays, you can scroll down quick to see where the station is, then scroll back up. Stop the video if you like to really get a lock on where you are, on the map.

There's more to be done in this post because there are stations mentioned in the video that I do NOT see on the up-to-date map below but again-- the concept is very good. Certainly the Google earth view can be used to detect convexity vs. concavity as well-- which should correspond to Antarctica as a rim or island but the video doesn't really make that as clear as I'd like. It appears convex, consistent with an island but the photos are arrayed pieces like a puzzle so manipulation is possible and likely. Anyway, I'll review the following video again and post updates below as I'm able to.

Saturday, May 28, 2016

If we're going to circumnavigate Antarctica by air or sea, we should check the weather but there's a problem.

Apparently, we can't check the weather in Antarctica. (Apologies in advance for the low volume and expletives used by the creator of the video which is interesting nonethe less.)

Friday, May 27, 2016

Measuring speed on water and in the air become a major problem for me.


Measuring speed on water and in the air become a major problem for me. 

I've been considering the problem of the distance around Antarctica as a way to verify a flat vs. a spherical earth for about a year now. Not once, in that time, have I really thought about how speed is measured-- on water or air. I'm familiar enough and trusting enough of the odometer in my car that I don't worry about land speed. It's speed over water and air that has me vexed now. I see all sorts of analyses and technical ways of understanding it when I do a search but frankly, I'm not grasping it as fully as I need to. It's a loose end. Without it, this mission is doomed. 

As a recent post I wrote began sinking in-- the one about the stupid computerized buoy's "they" are placing all over the world's oceans-- THOUSANDS upons THOUSANDS of them-- (financed by who again?)-- I started wondering exactly HOW they determined that a buoy would help determine that the speed of the ANTARCTIC CIRCUMNAVIGATION CURRENT (with it's own acronym ACC)-- was determined to be 1 knot or... in other articles I've seen 5 knots. NOTE that the difference is of an order of magnitude that could be the difference between a 15,000 vs. a 60,000 mile coast line for Antarctica. How convenient for "them" that there is "mass confusion" over this issue and that it's likely that not one-in-ten-million-people knows how to compute speed over water and air, either with ancient "old fashioned" methods nor modern "lying" GSP (which is NOT based on satellites-- which don't exist). 

I'm weary already. I'll continue to construct this entry over coming days. Right now, I have to tend to chores... the chores of a slave-human.



The following video will be turned into a youtube playlist in coming days and weeks as I learn more about how to measure distance in water and air. It turns out that I'm going to have to dig into this to be able to confirm or deny the distances various people are claiming is the distance around Antarctica. Join me in watching these videos as I teach myself how to navigate so we can understand the true distance around Antarctica-- and what to watch for if we watch others going around Antarctica.






Update on Sat. morning May 28, 2016. 
I only have 5 minutes to throw another idea into this post-- 

From  http://oceanmotion.org/guides/n_1/n_teacher_1.htm
quote 
The fundamental flaw in using this log line method to determine distance is that it does not account for the effects of surface currents. The log line method measures the speed of the ship relative to the surface water. It provides no means to estimate how fast the water itself flows. If a boat is carried westward by a strong current, the log line method will not reveal the existence of the current. This fact is related to Newton’s First Law of Motion, which states that steady motion in a straight line is “natural” and undetectable without reference to an outside reference object.
unquote

Rick continues-- Of course! How simple this concept is--- once you think about it. HOW am I  supposed to measure distance around Antarctica when I don't even know how distance is measured on the water-- and I didn't even understand the very basics of measuring speed on water-- or air for that matter. The OceanMotion.org link above provided this diagram of a log line used in determination of speed on water... It's actually a very tricky system. It's a problem... and if its a problem of this nature, it might be another key to unlocking the mystery of the length of the Antarctica coastline.

oceanmotion.org/guides/n_1/n_teacher_1.htm
To explain how ocean surface currents affect the path of floating objects. ..... Sailors measured the speed of the ship using the count of knots in the rope unrolled ..

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Circumnavigation by Carnegie in 1916 took 4 months but was well north of 60S.

You can see that the route of the Carnegie never goes higher than 60S latitude. You can see for yourself that there are significant "short cuts' being taken by the ship as seen in the pointed peaks of the dark line in the map below. On an azimuthal flat earth projection, those will be clearly seen as shortening the trip considerably. 

Notice that Antarctica is not completely outlined below. Note too that above 60S, the distance on an azimuthal projection increases considerably. It's quite concievable that if the short-cut routes of the Carnegie took 4 months-- that a non-short-cut-above-60S route (around 75S) -- would have taken much longer. My inaccurate sketch of that projection doesn't quite make that clear but you can at least see the problem we're faced with. More accurate maps can certainly be made... I'm just proposing a direction of research. 

Here's are links to stories about the Carnegie's voyages, including this Antarctica one.

https://library.gl.ciw.edu/ocean/carnegie/main.html

http://publicationsonline.carnegiescience.edu/legacy/exhibits/ault_exhibition/antarctica.html



I created the following map quickly in 5 minutes by eyeballing alone. It's not accurate but it's a starting point. You can see there's a big difference between the yellow line, the voyage as close as I could get it in 5 minutes, vs. that orange line which goes along Antarctica's coast. I guess we would have to capture the ship's logs and their latitude and longitude estimates-- and how they got those numbers-- a century ago. It's typical of many if not all of the circumnavigations of Antarctica I've seen involve latitudes that are too high for satisfying my curiosity about the true distance around Antarctica-- and the Carnegie is just another one-- albeit a bit more interesting than, say, the Vendee Races or individuals doing yacht trips around the southern oceans.




Monday, May 23, 2016

New Horizons Expedition tour claims to cover 1/3 of Antarctica coast in 1 month


New Horizon Expedition's partial circumnavigation takes 1 month, if true.

If the following 1/3 circumavigation route is covered by New Horizon Expeditions in one month-- then it appears possible to sail the entire circle around Antarctica in 3 or 4 months which would be consistent with a globe earth and a 15,000 mile 60 degree south latitude diameter circle around an island Antarctica. 
source: http://newhorizonexpeditions.com/expeditions/46/otl26%20ross%20sea.jpg
http://newhorizonexpeditions.com

TRIP ITINERARY AS ADVERTISED -- if it's real (which I haven't yet determined).

Visiting
Ushuaia, Argentina - Antarctic Peninsula - Peter I Island - Ross Ice Shelf - Macquarie Island - Invercargill (New Zealand)

Highlights
Landings by helicopter during voyage*
The wildlife of the Antarctic Peninsula, Amundsen & Ross Sea areas.
Stunning scenery, icebergs and glaciers. 
Ross Ice Shelf.
Cape Evans with the cabin of Robert Falcon Scott.
Visit US-station McMurdo and Scott Base (New Zealand).
Campbell Island.

Wildlife
Seabirds: Albatrosses, Fulmars, Petrels, Shags, Skuas, Prions, Shearwaters.
Penguins: Chinstrap, Gentoo, Adelies, Emperor, Royal.
Whales: Humpback, Fin, Minke, Orca, Southern Right, Blue, Sperm, Dolphins.
Seals: Weddell, Crabeater, Fur, Elephant & Leopard.

Duration
31 nights/32 days


Detailed Itinerary
Please note: Two voyages are available - Voyage NHO26 offers the same itinerary as voyage NHO25, but in reverse.

A true Discovery voyage including the southern Antarctic Peninsula, the rarely visited volcanic Peter I Island, exploratory program along the outer fringes of the pack-ice in the Amundsen sea, Roald Amundsen's starting point from where he gained access to the ice-shelf and finally reached the South Pole in 1911, sailing voyage in the Ross sea, the huts of British explorers Ernest Shackleton and Robert Falcon Scott, Mc Murdo Station, the Dry Valleys and Macquarie Island - Welcome aboard one of the most spectacular expeditions on our planet

*Helicopter transfers:
During these voyages we will transfer our passengers ashore by zodiac. There will also be two helicopters availalbe in the event that zodiacs can not be used. Potential candidates for helicopter transfers are Peter I Island, The Ross Ice-shelf, the Dry Valleys, Mc Murdo Station, Cape Evans (hut of Scott) and Cape Royds (hut of Shackleton). In theory we plan on five helicopter based landings, but a specific amount of helicopter time can not be predicted. The use of helicopters is a great advantage and can support in the goal to reach certain landing sites, that otherwise are almost inaccessible.


But, this is a true expedition and we operate our itinerary in the world's most remote area, ruled by the forces of nature, weather and ice conditions. Conditions may change rapidly, having its impact on helicopter operations and passengers should understand and accept this.

Safety is our greatest concern and no compromises can be made. No guarantees can be given and no claims will be accepted. The vessel is equipped with two helicopters, but in the case that one helicopter is unable to fly due to for example a technical failure, the helicopter operation will cease or even be cancelled, due to the fact that one helicopter always needs to be supported by a second operational helicopter. No guarantees can be given and in no event will claims be accepted.

Special note: crossing the Date Line:
Both NHO25 and NHO26 have a total duration of 31 nights / 32 days. However, looking at the starting and ending dates of the voyages, it "seems" that NHO25 has duration of 32 nights and NHO26 of 30 nights. This is explained by the fact that we cross the "date line" at 180 degrees longitude. Travelling on NHO25 and crossing the International Date Line, results in a day being added and on NHO26 results in a day being subtracted. In any case, the duration of the voyage is still 31 nights / 32 days for both voyages.

Please note: Voyage NHO26 offers the same itinerary as voyage NHO25, but in reverse.

Day 1

Ushuaia - In the afternoon, we embark in Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego, Argentina, the southernmost city in the world located at the Beagle Channel and sail through this scenic waterway for the rest of the evening.

Voyage NHO26 starts in Invercargill, New Zealand and offers the same itinerary as described hereunder, but in reverse.

Day 2 & 3: at sea


Day 4:
We arrive in the Antarctic Peninsula and sail in the early morning through the spectacular Lemaire Channel and land on Pléneau Island, where Elephant Seals haul-out on the beaches. Gentoo Penguins, Kelp Gulls and South Polar Skuas are confirmed breeders. Pléneau Island was first charted by the French Antarctic Expedition of 1903-05 of Jean-Baptiste Charcot and was named after his expedition's photographer Paul Pléneau. We will also visit Petermann Island with colonies of Adélie and Gentoo Penguins and Imperial Cormorants (Blue-eyed Shags). Petermann island was named after the German geographer August Petermann who was a member of a German Expedition in 1873-74.


Day 5:
Sailing south through the Penola Strait, we cross the Polar Circle and arrive at the Fish Islands. The small islands lying east of Flouder Island are called the Minnows, first charted by the British Graham Land Expedition (1934-37) of John Rymill. Detaille Island was discovered by the French expedition of Charcot (1903-05) and named for a share holder in the Magellan Whaling Company. From 1956 till 1959, The British Antarctic Survey had their "Station W" located on Detaille Island. On both locations we may observe Adélie Penguins and Blue-eyed Shags.

Day 6 - 7: 
Bellingshausen Sea, where we may see our first pack-ice.


Day 8:
Peter I Island or in Norwegian Peter I Øy is an uninhabited volcanic island (19 kilometres long ) in the Bellingshausen Sea. It was discovered by Fabian von Bellingshausen in 1821 and was named after the Russian Tsar Peter I. It is claimed by Norway and considered a territory by its own. It is sporadically visited by passenger vessels.

Day 9 - 14: 
These days we sail through the Amundsen Sea along and through the outer fringes of the pack-ice, which - depending of ice-conditions - will give us glimpses of the Antarctic Continent, while we take advantage of the west-going Antarctic coastal current.


The sailing along and through the ice is very lively, with sightings of single straggling Emperor Penguins, groups of seals on ice-floes, and also Orca's and Minke Whales along the ice-edge, often accompanied by different species of fulmar petrels.

If the sea-ice allows, we will try to land on Shephard Island in Marie Byrd Land among colonies of Chinstrap Penguins and South Polar Skua's. Shephard Island was discovered by the US Antarctic Expeditions (USAS) of 1939-41 and was named after one of the promoters of this expedition: John Shephard.


Day 15:
We approach the Ross Ice Shelf, a floating mass of land-ice, with a front of 30 meters high. In the Bay of Whales at the eastern side of the shelf, close to Roosevelt Island (named by the American aviator Richard E. Byrd in 1934 for President Franklin D. Roosevelt), Roald Amundsen gained access to the Shelf and ventured to the South Pole, where he finally arrived on 14 December 1911. For us it is perhaps a chance to climb on the shelf as well.

Day 16:
Along the Ross Ice Shelf we sail to the west.

Day 17 - 21:

In the Ross Sea we will visit Ross Island, guarded by Mount Erebus, Mount Terror and Mount Bird with all the famous spots which played such an important role in the dramatic British expeditions of the last century such as Cape Royds with the cabin of Ernest Shackleton. If ice-conditions are favourable, we will also visit Cape Evans with the cabin of Robert Falcon Scott; from Hut Point Scott and his men set out for the South Pole. We will further make attempts to visit the US-station McMurdo and Scott Base (New Zealand).

From Castle Rock we will have a great view across the Ross Ice Shelf toward the South Pole. We will have a view into Taylor Valley, one of the Dry valleys, where on our planet you are closest to the conditions on Mars. For the Dry Valleys we plan to use our helicopters. This is just one example of helicopter use during this epic voyage.

Day 22 - 23: 
Sailing northward along the eastern west coast of the Ross Sea ,we pass by the Drygalski Ice Tongue and the Italian Station in Terra Nova Bay and further cape Hallet.

Day 24: 
Cape Adare is the place where people for the very first time wintered on the Antarctic Continent. The hut where the Norwegian Borchgrevink stayed in 1899, is surrounded by the largest colony of Adélie Penguins in the World.

Day 25: at sea.

Day 26: 
We sail along Scott Island.

Day 27 - 29: at sea.
At sea towards Campbell Island.


Day 30: 
Campbell Island is a sub-Antarctic New Zealand Reserve and an Unesco World Heritage Site, with a luxuriant and blooming vegetation. The fauna on Campbell Island is fantastic with a large and easily accessible colony of Southern Royal Albatrosses on the main island and breeding Wandering, Campbell, Greyheaded, Blackbrowed, and Lightmantled Sooty Albatrosses on the satellite islands. Also three penguin species, Eastern Rockhopper, Erect-Crested and Yellow-Eyed Penguins breed here. In the 18th century seals were hunted to extinction, but Elephant Seals, Fur Seals and Sea Lions have recovered.

Day 31: at sea.

Day 32: 
We arrive in Bluff near Invercargill (New Zealand) where passengers depart for their homebound journey. Voyage OTL26 ends in Ushuaia, Argentina and starts in Bluff, near Invercargill and offers the same itinerary as described above, but in reverse.



Argo telemetry bouys indicate world is 5X as big in Southern Hemisphere than we're being told.


Argo is a program of ocean monitering using sophisticated bouys. Here's one-- 1900978
http://www.argodatamgt.org/Access-to-data/Description-of-all-floats2

It was released south of South Africa in 2009 and is now south of New Zealand. Thus it has taken 7 years to float 3/4 of the way around the world-- 7 years! It's right in the area where they say the Antarctica Circumpolar Current ACC is strongest. If you say 1-2 knots (I found 5 knots)... then we'll take your number-- say 1 knot. 

A 15,000 mile radius at 1 knot (close enough to 1 mph for our purpose here), that's 15,000 hours. It should take 15000 mi / 1 mph = 15,000 hours / 24 hr/day = 625 days or 1.7 years to circumnavigate at that latitude-- give or take. 

But so far it has taken 7 years or 4X as long to go just 3/4 of the way around. If it takes another 3 years to finish, it will have been 10 years vs. the 1.7-- or close to 2 years it should have taken. That's an order of magnitude of 5X-- which is close to the order of magnitude difference between a circumnavigation of 15,000 vs. 60,000 miles for spherical or flat earth at that latitude-- which is 4X. 

In effect, Argo Platform 1900978 proves earth is flat. Thanks, Felix!

INDEXED BELOW UNDER "Argo"

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Sitting on a raft can get you around Antarctica in 4 months (or 2 years)


By my cursory analysis below, it appears I could FLOAT around Antarctica in less than a month or take up to 2 years-- without SAILS! [Indexed under "Southern Ocean - floating around Antarctica" in index below]. --Captain Rick Potvin, Virtual Circumnavigation of Antarctica to Determine 15,000 or 60,000 miles.


GREAT SOUTHERN OCEAN
Here we see an old map with GREAT SOUTHERN OCEAN labelled. I was under the impression that the Southern Ocean was only labelled in the year 2000 and that before 2000, it was merely thought of as the southern Indian, southern Atlantic and south Pacific. After reading this informatative Wikipedia piece under "Great Southern Ocean", it's apparent that there is still a mixed approach to the naming of the water surrounding Antarctica. Southern Ocean - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Ocean






OCEAN CURRENT CIRCUMNAVIGATES ANTARCTICA
In my pursuit of a calculation of a true distance around Antarctica, I've overlooked the ocean current itself. According to the same Wikipedia article, The Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) is the strongest current system in the world oceans, linking the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific basins.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Ocean
Antarctic Circumpolar Current and Antarctic Convergence[edit]
The Antarctic Circumpolar Current moves perpetually eastward — chasing and joining itself, and at 21,000 km (13,000 mi) in length — it comprises the world's longest ocean current, transporting 130 million cubic metres per second (4.6×109 cu ft/s) of water – 100 times the flow of all the world's rivers.

TESTING the LENGTH OF ANTARCTICA CIRCUMPOLAR CURRENT
Given that the Wikipedia and official sources the claim is based on-- say that the current CHASES and JOINS itself (!?) for 13,000 miles... and is the "world's longest ocean current" and most VOLUMINOUS current-- what might we be able to do to test that? We'd have to become sailing experts, I suppose, and be able to determine our speed or velocity ON WATER in a CURRENT. We might be able to also determine the SPEED of the CIRCUMPOLAR CURRENT by itself, if it CHASES AND JOINS itself, somehow. We could theoretically set a boat on the water at one point-- say the Greenwich MERIDEAN... at ZERO degrees LONGTITUDE.... running through LONDON... and give it a little push east and see how long it takes for it to return to us from the west. Isn't this essentially what the Vendee Globe racers do-- with the added speed from wind sails? What IS the speed of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current? 

SEARCHING... 

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22antarctic+circumpolar+current%22+speed&btnG=Search&num=100&newwindow=1&safe=off&hl=en&gl=us&authuser=0

oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/ocng_textbook/.../chapter13_04.htm
Nov 2, 2007 ... The Antarctic Circumpolar Current is an important feature of the ... Typical current speeds are around 10 cm/s with speeds of up to 50 cm/s near ...


SPEED OF ANTARCTIC CIRCUMPOLAR CURRENT (ACC) is 10 CENTIMETERS PER SECOND? 
The units of measurement of the speed of the Antarctic current is quoted in centimeters per second. I didn't expect that. I expected KNOTS. How would we convert cm/s to knots? I'm not sure yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Circumpolar_Current
The Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) is an ocean current that flows clockwise from west to ... The ACC has been known to sailors for centuries; it greatly speeds up any travel from west to east, but makes sailing extremely difficult from east ...

oceanmotion.org/html/background/wind-driven-surface.htm
In that region, the current speed may be as great as 9 km per hr (5.5 mph). ... Atlantic Ocean gyres, prevailing winds generate the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.


SPEED OF ANTARCTIC CURRENT ACC in MPH = 5.5 -- or is it 24 knots? 
It seems that we could be considering an order of magnitude of about 5 mph as an ocean current speed in the Antarctic. With a 15,000 mile circuit, the water would chase itself around and around for 15,000 miles / 5 miles/hr for 3000 hours -- roughly 4 months. That's fairly quick. It becomes apparent that the Vendee Globe Race claim of circling the Antarctica at 60S in 3 months is realistic-- if it's actually occurring. However it also appears that the wind doesn't speed them up too much. If they sat on a raft and did not sail, they would still circle the globe in 4 months.
www.shorstmeyer.com/msj/geo130/antarctica/polarinfo.pdf
The Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) is the most important current in the Southern ... The average wind speed between 40°S and 60°S is 15 to 24 knots wit

INDICATIONS SO FAR VARY FROM 5 mph to 24 KNOTS
So far, I'm coming up with 5 mph to 5X as fast as that-- in the order of magnitude of 24 knots which is close enough to 24 mph to be useful for my consideration. Note that the variance is about 5X, which is consistent with the variance between a spherical earth and flat earth estimate of the distance around Antarctica-- the distance being 15,000 vs. 60,000 miles.  If the ocean current is 5X  as fast by certain estimates, then the trip around Antarctica should take less than a month, by simply sitting on a raft. On the other hand, if the time to circumnavigate the world is indeed 4 months by ocean current alone, we might be looking at 5X that time or 20 months, close to 2 years-- which is Captain Cook's time, they say, to circuit Antarctica. It's pretty confusing at this point but these numbers are at least a starting point. I need to do better work and be more accurate as to what I'm talking about. Where is the "father" in this picture by the way? He could be the one taking the picture I guess. This is not Antarctica, that's for sure.



ICE FLOES ARE NOT SUBSTANTIALLY HINDERING ANTARCTIC OCEAN CURRENT
If we did float on a raft around Antarctica at 5 to 25 knots, it's quite possible that we could avoid ice altogether at 60S. The Latitude lines below are in 5 deg increments and fake satellite (acutally GPS etc) pictures show that we have clear sailing at 60S. At 65S we encounter significant ice and land. 
http://www.shorstmeyer.com/msj/geo130/antarctica/polarinfo.pdf

PRETTY 3D PICTURE OF ANTARCTIC OCEAN CURRENTS
It's interesting to consider the following pretty 3D picture. Note the surface "ACC" which is what we're interested in if we FLOAT around Antarctica on a RAFT. 



http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Mi-Oc/Ocean-Currents.html


CONCLUSION
It appears that we can DRIFT around Antarctica without sails and simply ride the current on a raft. I would choose a houseboat over a raft however since I could include all the comforts of home. An old unpowered yacht or cruise ship might be better. No power and no sails would be required. I might start looking for a good deal on an old seaworthy riverboat with a non-working engine.

Saturday, May 21, 2016

Vendee Race is fake IMO-- witness the staged interest in what contestant says.


There are many fake things going on in the world. I was interviewed by www.Fakeologist.com 's Ab Irato awhile ago to review my Who Did 9/11 forum which concurred with SeptemberClues and Ab Irato that 9/11 was nothing  more than TV trickery. I'm not sure why I was "blessed" with the ability to see through fakery along with precious few others but I can. It's like wearing x-ray glasses-- the kind advertised in the comic books that let you see through women's clothing. Or the sunglasses in the movie "They" that let you see the signs that teach you to obey. So here's a photo that the Vendee Race stooges use as promotional material I guess. Only for me it's a dead giveaway to a hoax because it just doesn't look right.



Why are these "reporters" so anxious to hear what the Vendee racer is going to say next? Does this picture make any sense-- or is it a staged event similar to other staged news events with fake reporters? The entire route of the Vendee Race and the idea that sailboats race around 60 degrees south in cold rough ocean is absurd to begin with. 

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

Miles between stations documentation

Here's a list of miles in chart form that I found in June 2015 that I didn't follow up on and have lost the source for. I might be able to re-find it and examine it more closely again. The position column for the first two entries, Theil AT26 and SkyBlu AT24 seems odd-- listed as 151 to 331 degrees. That doesn't seem right. What does it mean? It appear that the "Distance to Next" column is telling us that it's 634 miles from Theil to SkyBlu.


DISTANCES BETWEEN STATIONS 
Here's an excellent map of the sort that shows distances between research stations. This map is part of a report on the possibility of an inter-station transport service from the 1960's that was never implemented. (I'll have to find the link again since I didn't document my find here very well in 2015). I'll list key distances that I can now double check... below this map. The mileages were probably calculated from a standard map that has earth as a globe-- rather than measured by doing actual travel. Still, it's a starting point and I don't have to do those calculations since they're done for me. That's convenience.

Let's begin a trial circumnavigation at Siple (USA) on the left. We're only going to be using the mileages on the perimeter. Internal continental mileages will be useful too but I need to focus on one thing at a time-- and the perimeter is what I'm mainly interested in.

Siple to Hailey Bay (UK) is 810 Nautical miles-- which are smaller than miles by some factor.... which I don't know at this moment-- so we'll leave it at 810 miles-- good enough for order of magnitude.

How can we double check that a direct flight between Siple and Haily is indeed 810 miles? How long should a flight take in different type of aircraft? If we're flying at 200 mph, it should take about 4 or 5 hours. If earth is flat and they're lying about the distance, it should take 4X as long-- or about 16 hours-- all day. 

Halley (UK) to Senae (RSA)(?) is 550 miles
Senae (RSA) to Novolazareskaya (USSR) = 300 miles
Novolazareskaya (USSR) to Showa (Japan) = 620 miles
Showa (Japan) to Molodesnaya (USSR) = 160 miles

Interestingly, Mawson is left out of the trip.

Molodeznaya (USSR) to Davis (Aus) = 700 miles
Molodeznaya (USSR) to Mirnyy (USSR) = 1066 miles
Davis (Aust) to Mirnyy (USSR) = 360 miles
Mirnyy (USSR) to Casey (Aust) = 420 miles
Casey (Aust) to Dumont D'urville/Carrafour (Fr) = 720 miles
Mirnyy (USSR) to Dumont D'urville/Carrefour (Fr) = 1080 miles
Dumont D'urville/Carrefour (Fr) to McMurdo/Scott (USA/NZ) = 810 miles
McMurdo/Scott  (USA/NZ) to Russkaya (USSR) = 880 miles
Russkaya (USSR) to Siple (USA) = 900 miles
Siple (USA) to Halley (UK) = 810 miles


ACCUMULATED MILES USING INTERSTATION STYEM MAP MILES FROM 1960s
If we add up the miles travelled, cumulatively, using the numbers above, we end up with 8099 miles. That seems low. Antarctica should be about 15,000 miles around--- which is about 2X the cumulative number. 



AIRPORT AT SENAE and Halley
Note on the map below that there are airports at Halley (UK) and Sanae (RSA). We have the distance for that from the 1960's proposed transportation connection at being 550 nautical miles with a direct route. That should take about 3 hours at 200 mph. It should take 4X as long-- or 12 hours if earth is flat. The problem is that I'm not going to able to find any actual travel between those stations owned by different countries (UK and South Africa). 



PROPOSED INTERSTATION SYSTEM PAPER LISTS "ELAPSED TIME"
Here is part of a chart from the interstation paper from the 1960's that lists "elapsed time" for a C-130 Hercules between different stations.  If we look at only Molodeznayad and Halley Bay, the 2nd item down, we leave Molo at 8 am and arrive at Halley Bay at 1300 hours. I guess we're assuming "universal time" here or GMT as it is traditionally called. The Flight Time is listed as 5 hours but elapased time is 29 hours, about 6X as long. It might be that the actual flying time is compared with the time of the trip including landing, refuelling, and waiting. If that is true, then it's interesting to note that that Elapsed Time is at least consistent with a flat earth flying time of 4X as long. It might be interesting to note how far and long a C-130 can fly without refuelling. Would it be able to fly 20 hours? The Elapsed Time might be a cover for Actual Flying Time. 



DIFFICULT TO DETERIMINE 
I thought this determination of 15,000 vs. 60,000 miles would be relatively easy to determine but it's turning out to be difficult.

Sunday, May 15, 2016

1983 Antarctic Circumnavigation by POLAR STAR

I can't yet find any of the timing data on the 1983 Polar Star US Coast Guard 3/4 circumnavigation (they claim) but here's the map. I'll post more in coming days and weeks on this. You can find it in the index under Polar Star USCG expeditions - 1983.

Rick's comment-- The map is split on the left because I had to take copies from each side of an online image of a book.  I'll post sources later. Notice that in 1983, the Polar Star visited many stations and completely avoided the Unclaimed Area of Marie Byrd Land in the lower left. 

Friday, May 13, 2016

Partial circumnavigation in 2014/15 by Antarktis OPPOSITE to Paulsen's upcoming Treshnikov trip.

ANTARKTIS TRAVELLED SAME PLANNED ROUTE AS PAULSEN in REVERSE
I ran across another apparent claimed partial circumnavigation of Antarctica by a group calling itself Antarktis.net which looks Dutch to me. They also have "carbon-neutral" on their site which indicates that they're part of the development-prevention cause. The path they took is the REVERSE of what Fred Paulsen / Swiss ACE plan to take this coming 2016/17 summer in Antarctica. 
SOURCE: 
http://www.antarctic.eu/triplogs-photo-galleries/antarctica-2014_2015.html
Note how the trip begins in South America on the left side of this map and ends in New Zealand at the bottom. Note the list of targeted places they visit do NOT involve research stations-- an anomalie similar to Paulsen's upcoming trip-- other than the station at Macquarie Island. I don't see how they plan to avoid that. Note how this Antarktis trip maintains a tight perimeter only around Unclaimed Land (Marie Byrd Land) and that both Paulsen's Swiss ACE trip and this Antarktis trip stay away from the other 3/4 of Antarctica's coastline where it would be easier to dock at the research stations that line the perimeter/coast.


COUNTER CURRENT VOYAGE BY ANTARKTIS
Note that the maps of the water currents in the Southern Ocean around Antarctica are WEST to EAST... yet Antarktis sailed EAST to WEST. I'm not knowledgeable about powered ships and how much more energy it takes to sail against current but I'm just noting that here as a point. It's not likely that powered ships are hindered by sailing upcurrent. 



1983 INSPECTION TOUR SAILED 3/4 AROUND ANTARCTICA
Note how the following route map of the Inspection Tour of 1983 travels the portion of Antarctica, close to the shoreline, stopping AT THE RESEARCH STATIONS. This shows that it's POSSIBLE to do so-- something that neither Paulsen nor the Antarktis voyages did. 


RUSSKAYA is WITHIN A STONE'S THROW of PAULSEN'S VOYAGE
Given Paulsen's association with the Russians-- and his admiration for their polar work on both ends, north and south, you would think that Paulsen would visit the RUSSKAYA station located just a bit south of where the TRESHNIKOV will sail. Felix noted in an earlier post that Russkaya may not be operational. Still, Paulsen's trip in 2015/16 is an ecology and environment trip-- ostensibly-- so it would behoove him to visit Russkaya on behalf of the Russians simply for the environment's sake. 
See RUSSKAYA on the bottom left of Antarctica. 


RUSSKAYA and PAULSEN'S TRESHNIKOV 2015/16 ROUTE ON FLAT EARTH
I roughly plotted the Treshnikov's route on a flat earth projection of Earth (dotted red line). It's interesting to see that the Treshnikov travels very close to Russkaya.

RUSSKAYA RESEARCH STATION REVIEW


PAULSEN'S TRIP AVOIDS RUSSKAYA
Now that we have a better idea, via several maps, of where Russkaya is and where previous voyages have gone, witness Paulsen's trip again. 





Rick's tentative conclusion-- It seems to me that there is NO DATA on times and distances travelled by the Antarktis voyage and therefore no way to cross reference anything. This is going to be the problem for Paulsen's Treshnikov journey too. I'm only beginning to see that the use of GPS is a problem and that these Antarctica trips are not documenting their ordinary travel logs for public consumption. Overall, it shouldn't be a problem because the magnitude of the time and distance scale should make things obvious. Still, it's a problem that I haven't really got a grip on. The curious anomalies that pop up in the back of my mind (like popcorn) just keep popping up (like popcorn) and it's just too much to try to deal with at this time. Why can't anyone make a simple circumnavigation, touching base with all research stations and note time and distance and tell us how it was done? I've got hundreds of pieces of information but I can't pull them tegether. It's always "close but no cigar" type of thing. 




UPDATE: 
CASE STUDY OF A RUSSIAN VOYAGE in EAST ANTARCTICA 2014/2015 & 2016 with loose times and distance calculations as an example of loose data in general and what I have to go through to get a handle on these types of accounts.

In comments below, Felix pointed to this trip by a Russian ship...
http://www.raexp.ru/ocherednoi-antarct-poxod-nes.html

TRANSLATION OF PART OF IT... 

After a short stay in South Africa "Akademik Fedorov" December 7 will go to the domestic field the Antarctic base of Youth [Molodezhnaya]

Parking vessel on the basis of the Youth Field [Molodezhnaya] will be held from 15 to 17 December, after which the ship will proceed to raid a Russian Progress station, located on the coast of Prydz Bay

From 03 to January 6, 2015 the vessel will go on a raid Mirny station - 3 days travel

In the period from 07 to 12 January 2015 the ship will proceed to the area of ​​the ice cap Zavadovskiy

From 13 to 15 January the ship will be in the region of the approaches to the Bunger Hills

January 16-17, the ship will go back to the Peace Station [Mirnyy

25 January will go back to Progress station. 

February 8 in Cape Town, which is scheduled to arrive on 20 February

SUMMARY
Dec. 7- South Africa
Dec. 15 - Molodeznaya
? - Progress
Jan 6 - Mirny
Jan 13 - Bunger Hills
Jan 17 - Mirney
Jan 25 - Progress

Bunger hills is 220 miles east of Mirney
quote: 
but an overwintering attempt failed, and the occupants had to be evacuated to Mirny Station (350 km/220 mi to the west) on March 17.
unquote
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47brotherthebig/03files/Antarctic_Bunger_Oasis.html

[Rick's note: See how OASIS II (SOVIET UNION) is South Of Mirneyy on the above map... with the Australian "Edgeworth" nearly on top of it... without Bunger Hills being labelled-- however I think Bunger Hills IS this area] 

Stations
The Soviet Union built a scientific station by the name of Oazis in the center of the area at 66°16'29"S, 100°44'49"E, starting October 15, 1956, with two buildings for eight people.

The Soviet Union became interested in the Bunger Hills again in the late 1980s, and built a new station - Oazis-2 - a few hundred metres to the west of Dobrowolski. The station was used for summer visits up to the mid-1990s.
Bunger Hills or Bunger Lakes or Bunger Oasis is a coastal range on the Knox Coast in Wilkes Land in Antarctica, consisting of a group of moderately low, roundedcoastalhills, overlain by morainicdrift and notably ice free throughout the year, lying south of the Highjump Archipelago.[1]

Bunger Oasis 
66° 17' 0" S, 100° 47' 0" E 

[Rick's note: The entire trip cited above lies along roughtly the 66 deg S. latitude line-- with Longitude at 100 E. The entire trip ran from about 45 E (MoloDezhNaya)  to Bunger (Oasis II) 100 E... that 55 deg of long. at 66 south lat. where the spherical earth would be x1 miles in diameter and each degree of longitude would be x2. 

Total distance travelled would have been 55 X x2.
Total time would have been Dec.7 to Jan. 13 or about 5 weeks.
Travel time would have been shorter since there were stays at each stop but I'm only interested in an order of magnitude estimate right now without subtracting the stop times. 

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/gccalc.shtml

[Rick's note-- Total distance travelled would have been 2X 1300 nm for the return trip or 2600 nm in 5 weeks with only a part of the time for travel since a lot of time was spent docked. That's about 500 nautical miles per week or 71 miles per day on average including stops ON A SPHERICAL EARTH. At this latitude there are 1300/55 = 23 miles per degree of longitude on a spherical earth.

On a FLAT EARTH, there would 4X that-- which is 92 miles per degree of longitude for a total of 92 miles X 55 degrees = 5000 miles. They would have had to have travelled 10,000 miles in total in 5 weeks for 2000 miles a week, or 285 miles a day with stops.  

Rick's conclusion-- The site that Felix pointed to has no cross referencing data. The length of the stops are not clear. The travel times are not clear. The distance travelled, according to the captain, are not stated. 
Travelling 71 miles a day with stops would mean twice that mileage if half the time were spent docked... so they would have had to travel 142 miles a day through ice floes for 5 weeks while moving. That seems hard to believe.  The distance would have been 4X that on a flat earth which is impossible to believe. There are no reports of rendezvous's with crews at the research stations. It's in Russian so it's impossible to decipher anything further. 

2nd example
http://meteoinfo.ru/news/1-2009-10-01-09-03-06/11761-29102015-29-61-
Progress station (Dec. 23-28) - Mirny (January 2-6, 2016 .) - oceanographic research (12-18 January) - Progress station (Jan. 20 - Feb. 15)
Travel from Progress to Mirny presumably Dec. 28 to Jan 2, or 5 days for about 20 degrees of longitude at about 66 S. would be 23 miles per degree X 20 = about 460 miles or 92 miles a day-- possible I suppose on a sphere... certainly not feasible if it was 4X that on a flat earth for almost 400 miles a day. 

Rick's conclusion-- Again no real data that can be relied on here of the quality we need to cross check things... only several thick paragraphs of description that we have to accept as written. 

NOTE TO FELIX
Thanks. I looked at all of that and there's no way to cross check anything. We have to take their word for it, in their long paragraphs, that they were where they said when they said. Nothing posted looks to me like actual ship logs or captain's diary. It's all written in long paragraphs with no tables, charts, pictures, or anything checkable.

I DID check the figures, in any case. They would have had to travel between 90 and 140 miles a day through ice floes. I don't think that is possible even in modern ships. If we think about travelling 6 miles an hour for 24 hours-- unlikely that they sailed 24 hours straight-- or 12 miles an hour for 12 hours-- a workshift-- they could have done it I supposed. There are NO PICTURES of the sea ice they encountered so there's no way to verify their account. Here's a possible picture of the sea ice they would encounter-- where they say they travelled 12 miles per hour... http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/131226184059-tsr-live-keiler-antarctica-chris-turney-stuck-on-ice-00024425-story-top.jpg

That's not neccessarily around Mirnyy and Progress but it's an example of the type of photo we have to have to believe these types of logs. 

Rick's conclusion-- The voyages could have taken 4X as long and we wouldn't know-- because there is no way to cross check the account. A trip could take from November to April (6 months) instead of 5 weeks from Dec to Jan, through the summer of the southern hemisphere. The ship could have travelled faster than 12 mph on average for 12 hours a day in ice free water. How fast can these ships go? I don't know. I should know. There is no data on ship's speed. I have to independently find out where the fuel depots are, how much fuel the ship carries, the type of boat. There are no names of captains or crew. Nothing.