Home > AGW, Climate Change, Global Warming, Omniclimate, Science, Skepticism > No Ice Radar? No Catlin Expedition!

No Ice Radar? No Catlin Expedition!

The Catlin trio has given up on ice radar“, reports David Shukman on the BBC today.

This is a bad sign. Twice bad: as it calls into question the need for risking the lives of the team any further, and the overall organization of the expedition.

The Catlin trio should just pack up and come back home before anything truly bad does happen.

The SPRITE “ice radar” is (was) not just another instrument. It was THE meaning for the whole expedition. Here’s a screenshot from the Catlin Arctic Survey’s science pages on their website:
Catlin Science pages

Such a surface Survey has never before been attempted

The team’s ground-penetrating radar (SPRITE) will distinguish between the base ice layer and any over-lying snow layer

The Catlin Arctic Survey’s data will allow for the re-evaluation of satellite and submarine digitised observations of recent decades – and future ones – and thereby improve the accuracy and confidence of the modelled outputs.

Even the BBC noticed the extreme importance of SPRITE for providing a meaning to the Catlin trio’s efforts, as it can be seen in the caption of the image opening one of their first articles on the expedition (by Jonathan Amos in February 2009):

BBC introducing the Catlin expedition (1)

The yellow SPRITE radar is the expedition’s key piece of kit

And in the text:

“It is intended to give scientists the very latest “ground truth”, to better constrain their models and their interpretation of the observations coming from satellites.

‘No other information on ice thickness like this is expected to be made available to the scientific community in 2009,’ explained Arctic ice modeller Professor Wieslaw Maslowski, a science advisor to the survey.”

What needs to be done now? According to the latest BBC article:

As a result, the explorers are now drilling more sampling holes than planned, which means they are progressing more slowly than hoped.

But what is the point of that? This is what Amos wrote back in February:

BBC on Catlin - detail

At frequent intervals, the team will also gather manually the same data by drilling through the ice. This will put a calibration check on the radar measurements.

The manually-drilled sampling holes are meant to be just calibration measures for the radar. Hence, if there is no radar, there is little meaning in drilling any sampling hole. Furthermore:

Over the course of the expedition, the team hopes to have gathered millions of readings.

Obviously, those millions of reading will simply not be there. A couple of thousands of manual measurements cannot be a scientifically-plausible substitute for millions of automatic readings.

And as already mentioned, the SPRITE debacle actually suggests the risk for the above is not minimal. In fact, how did such a “key piece of kit” manage to become useless? Shukman again:

The failures are blamed on problems with power supplies, either with batteries not working or with cables snapping in the cold.

Now, what kind of organization put together their most important equipment for a winter-starting polar mission using material unable to withstand extreme cold? What else have they forgotten to consider?

I for one would not mind if Hadow, Daniels and Hartley were to try again in 2010 or 2011. It’s just the 2009 effort that worries me (a lot) regarding their well-being.

Advertisements
  1. Gary
    2009/04/22 at 15:47

    Clearly, their SPRITE radar was not equipped to handle extreme cold, because they did not expect to find any extreme cold up there! Isn’t the Artic supposed to melt this year? Become an open ocean? Why plan for extreme cold if your plan is to document a melt, not a freeze?

  2. 2009/04/22 at 14:31

    This is very sad, just as sad as losing that satellite that would have helped to show us where the big carbon sinks are. Fortunately the Japanese got theirs up, though that would only focus on the major sources of carbon. Considering that fossil fuel burning only contributes to about 5% of the turnover in the carbon cycle, it would be interesting to see if there are natural sources that release more CO2 than industrial areas.

  3. Douglas Hoyt
    2009/04/19 at 11:17

    Perhaps the plan is to stay on the ice until it breaks up and the planes can’t land. Then a dramatic rescue will be required because the ice is melting rapidly “due to global warming”. It would then just be a big publicity stunt.

  1. 2011/02/24 at 22:49
  2. 2010/10/01 at 19:51
  3. 2010/01/07 at 09:36

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: