DOCSLIB.ORG

M98-1 Forweb

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
M98-1 Forweb 98-1 Construction, Maintenance, and Operation of a Glacial Runway, McMurdo Station, Antarctica George L. Blaisdell, Renee M. Lang, Gerald Crist, Keith Kurtti, R. Jeffrey Harbin, and Daniel Flora March 1998 MONOGRAPH Abstract: On 7 February 1994, a C-141 departed Christ- church. The primary benefit of the Pegasus runway to church, New Zealand, and landed on the 3050-m the U.S. Antarctic Program is its ability to support heavy (10,000-ft) Pegasus glacial ice runway, located on the wheeled aircraft for most of the period of mid-January Ross Ice Shelf 13 km (8 miles) south of McMurdo, through November. In the past, only ski-equipped aircraft Antarctica. This event marked the final test for a five- could land in the McMurdo area during this time period. year development program to demonstrate the feasibil- The Pegasus runway allows increased payloads for the ity of a semipermanent glacial ice runway capable LC-130 (an additional 3600-kg or 8000-lb takeoff of supporting heavy wheeled aircraft at a site easily weight when using wheels) and provides access for accessible to McMurdo. In the later phases of develop- virtually any conventional aircraft. The technology for ing the glacial ice runway, numerous working flights of siting, constructing, maintaining, and operating such a LC-130s operating on wheels (rather than skis) moved runway is now well understood and is described in detail cargo more efficiently to the South Pole, and the LC-130 in this comprehensive report. and a C-130 carried larger passenger loads to Christ- Cover: First C-141 Starlifter operation on a glacial ice runway (McMurdo, Antarctica; 7 February 1994). Following successful landing and taxi tests, the aircraft took on 54 passengers and priority cargo and completed the 6-hour return flight to Christchurch, New Zealand. How to get copies of CRREL technical publications: Department of Defense personnel and contractors may order reports through the Defense Technical Information Center: DTIC-BR SUITE 0944 8725 JOHN J KINGMAN RD FT BELVOIR VA 22060-6218 Telephone 1 800 225 3842 E-mail [email protected] [email protected] WWW http://www.dtic.dla.mil/ All others may order reports through the National Technical Information Service: NTIS 5285 PORT ROYAL RD SPRINGFIELD VA 22161 Telephone 1 703 487 4650 1 703 487 4639 (TDD for the hearing-impaired) E-mail [email protected] WWW http://www.fedworld.gov/ntis/ntishome.html A complete list of all CRREL technical publications is available from USACRREL (CECRL-LP) 72 LYME RD HANOVER NH 03755-1290 Telephone 1 603 646 4338 E-mail [email protected] For information on all aspects of the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, visit our World Wide Web site: http://www.crrel.usace.army.mil Monograph 98-1 US ArmyArmy CorpsCorps of EngineersEngineers®® Cold Regions Research & Cold Regions Research & Engineering Laboratory Laboratory Construction, Maintenance, and Operation of a Glacial Runway, McMurdo Station, Antarctica George L. Blaisdell, Renee M. Lang, Gerald Crist, Keith Kurtti, R. Jeffrey Harbin, and Daniel Flora March 1998 Prepared for OFFICE OF POLAR PROGRAMS NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. FOREWORD This report is dedicated to Dr. Malcolm Mellor. His high level of energy and tech- nical persuasion secured the support for this project. Malcolm eagerly drove the bulldozer making the first passes that exposed the glacial ice which would eventu- ally lead to the Pegasus runway. We regret that, because of his untimely death, he did not have the opportunity to share in many of the discoveries made during the construction process, nor in the runway’s successful completion and operation. Photo by Charles Swithinbank ii PREFACE This report was prepared by George L. Blaisdell, Research Civil Engineer, Applied Research Division, U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Labo- ratory, Hanover, New Hampshire, Renee M. Lang, Consultant, Sigma Technologies, Gerald Crist, Snow and Ice Construction Specialist, Antarctic Support Associates, Keith Kurtti, Fabricator, Antarctic Support Associates, R. Jeffrey Harbin, Operator, Antarctic Support Associates, and Daniel Flora, Snow and Ice Construction Special- ist, Antarctic Support Associates. This work was performed for the National Science Foundation, Office of Polar Programs under a Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The authors thank NSF for the opportunity to conduct this study and for their continued support throughout the development. The authors also thank Paul Sellmann and Dr. Charles Swithinbank for their technical review of this report. The authors are very grateful to Antarctic Support Associates for their commit- ment to this project. Many individuals from ASA contributed greatly to its success. The authors are particularly thankful to the U.S. Navy’s VXE-6 squadron and to the Naval Support Force–Antarctica. Without their willingness to try something new, the authors could have proven only that glacial ice could be graded flat and that it could support a concentrated load of ballast. During the early phases of this project, the authors received advice and assistance from experts at the Russian Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute (AARI); their contribution was very beneficial. The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising or promotional pur- poses. Citation of brand names does not constitute an official endorsement or ap- proval of the use of such commercial products. iii CONTENTS Page Foreword .................................................................................................................... ii Preface ........................................................................................................................ iii Executive summary .................................................................................................. ix Chapter 1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. Site investigation ................................................................................... 4 Initial siting ........................................................................................................... 4 Physical properties of sites ................................................................................. 4 Ice characteristics ............................................................................................ 4 Ice surface characteristics ............................................................................... 9 Snow depth, accumulation, and ablation .................................................... 10 Trend of accumulation/ablation transition ................................................ 13 Snow drifting ................................................................................................... 13 Movement of glacier ....................................................................................... 15 Presence of contaminants............................................................................... 15 Flight plate ....................................................................................................... 17 Logistical suitability........................................................................................ 19 Access for construction .................................................................................. 19 Establishing database .......................................................................................... 20 Weather characteristics .................................................................................. 20 Ice temperature profile ................................................................................... 21 Solar radiation ................................................................................................. 23 Topography and ice movement .................................................................... 25 Data analysis .................................................................................................... 25 Making site selection ...................................................................................... 25 Environmental impact evaluation ..................................................................... 26 Chapter 3. Construction ........................................................................................... 27 Site development ................................................................................................. 27 Facilities ............................................................................................................ 28 Access road ...................................................................................................... 29 Initial open-up ................................................................................................. 30 Runway construction .......................................................................................... 34 First grading and inspection.......................................................................... 35 Filling of low areas .......................................................................................... 40 Preparations for final grading ....................................................................... 41 Final ice grading .............................................................................................. 42 Snow management during construction .........................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Office of Polar Programs
    DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SURFACE TRAVERSE CAPABILITIES IN ANTARCTICA COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION DRAFT (15 January 2004) FINAL (30 August 2004) National Science Foundation 4201 Wilson Boulevard Arlington, Virginia 22230 DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SURFACE TRAVERSE CAPABILITIES IN ANTARCTICA FINAL COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose.......................................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Comprehensive Environmental Evaluation (CEE) Process .......................................................1-1 1.3 Document Organization .............................................................................................................1-2 2.0 BACKGROUND OF SURFACE TRAVERSES IN ANTARCTICA..................................2-1 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................2-1 2.2 Re-supply Traverses...................................................................................................................2-1 2.3 Scientific Traverses and Surface-Based Surveys .......................................................................2-5 3.0 ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................................................3-1
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (CEE) for ANDRILL Mcmurdo Sound Portfolio Madrid, 9/20 De Junio 2003
    XXVI ATCM Working Paper WP-002-NZ Agenda Item: IV CEP 4a NEW ZEALAND Original: English DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (CEE) FOR ANDRILL McMurdo Sound Portfolio Madrid, 9/20 de junio 2003 ANDRILL - The McMurdo Sound Portfolio An international research effort with the participation of Germany, Italy, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (CEE) FOR ANDRILL McMurdo Sound Portfolio Antarctica New Zealand Private Bag 4745, Christchurch Administration Building International Antarctic Centre 38 Orchard Road, Christchurch January 22, 2003 2 CONTENTS 1. NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY.....................................................................................11 2. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................13 2.1 What is ANDRILL?...............................................................................................13 2.2 The CEE process.................................................................................................15 2.2.1 What is a CEE and why is it needed?....................................................15 2.2.2 Process for preparing the Draft CEE .....................................................15 3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITES ..............................................................17 2.1 Purpose and Need...............................................................................................17 3.1.1 Scientific justification..............................................................................17
    [Show full text]
  • A NEWS BULLETIN Published Quarterly by the NEW ZEALAND ANTARCTIC SOCIETY (INC)
    A NEWS BULLETIN published quarterly by the NEW ZEALAND ANTARCTIC SOCIETY (INC) An English-born Post Office technician, Robin Hodgson, wearing a borrowed kilt, plays his pipes to huskies on the sea ice below Scott Base. So far he has had a cool response to his music from his New Zealand colleagues, and a noisy reception f r o m a l l 2 0 h u s k i e s . , „ _ . Antarctic Division photo Registered at Post Ollice Headquarters. Wellington. New Zealand, as a magazine. II '1.7 ^ I -!^I*"JTr -.*><\\>! »7^7 mm SOUTH GEORGIA, SOUTH SANDWICH Is- . C I R C L E / SOUTH ORKNEY Is x \ /o Orcadas arg Sanae s a Noydiazarevskaya ussr FALKLAND Is /6Signyl.uK , .60"W / SOUTH AMERICA tf Borga / S A A - S O U T H « A WEDDELL SHETLAND^fU / I s / Halley Bav3 MINING MAU0 LAN0 ENOERBY J /SEA uk'/COATS Ld / LAND T> ANTARCTIC ••?l\W Dr^hnaya^^General Belgrano arg / V ^ M a w s o n \ MAC ROBERTSON LAND\ '■ aust \ /PENINSULA' *\4- (see map betowi jrV^ Sobldl ARG 90-w {■ — Siple USA j. Amundsen-Scott / queen MARY LAND {Mirny ELLSWORTH" LAND 1, 1 1 °Vostok ussr MARIE BYRD L LAND WILKES LAND ouiiiv_. , ROSS|NZJ Y/lnda^Z / SEA I#V/VICTORIA .TERRE , **•»./ LAND \ /"AOELIE-V Leningradskaya .V USSR,-'' \ --- — -"'BALLENYIj ANTARCTIC PENINSULA 1 Tenitnte Matianzo arg 2 Esptrarua arg 3 Almirarrta Brown arc 4PttrtlAHG 5 Otcipcion arg 6 Vtcecomodoro Marambio arg * ANTARCTICA 7 Arturo Prat chile 8 Bernardo O'Higgins chile 1000 Miles 9 Prasid«fTtB Frei chile s 1000 Kilometres 10 Stonington I.
    [Show full text]
  • Development Pressures on the Antarctic Wilderness
    XXVIII ATCM – IP May 2004 Original: English Agenda Items 3 (Operation of the CEP) and 4a (General Matters) DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES ON THE ANTARCTIC WILDERNESS Submitted to the XXVIII ATCM by the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES ON THE ANTARCTIC WILDERNESS 1. Introduction In 2004 the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition (ASOC) tabled information paper ATCM XXVII IP 094 “Are new stations justified?”. The paper highlighted proposals for the construction of no less than five new Antarctic stations in the context of at least 73 established stations (whether full year or summer only), maintained by 26 States already operating in the Antarctic Treaty Area. The paper considered what was driving the new station activity in Antarctica, whether or not it was necessary or desirable, and what alternatives there might be to building yet more stations. Whilst IP 094 focused on new station proposals, it noted that there were other significant infrastructure projects underway in Antarctica, which included substantial upgrades of existing national stations, the development of air links to various locations in Antarctica and related runways, and an ice road to the South Pole. Since then, ASOC has become aware of additional proposals for infrastructure projects. This paper updates ASOC’s ATCM XXVII IP 094 to include most infrastructure projects planned or currently underway in Antarctica as of April 2005, and discusses their contribution to cumulative impacts. The criteria used to select these projects are: 1. The project’s environmental impact is potentially “more than minor or transitory”; 2. The project results in a development of infrastructure that is significant in the Antarctic context; 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Nsf.Gov OPP: Report of the U.S. Antarctic Program Blue Ribbon
    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MORE AND BETTER SCIENCE IN ANTARCTICA THROUGH INCREASED A LOGISTICAL EFFECTIVENESS Report of the U.S. Antarctic Program Blue Ribbon Panel Washington, D.C. July 23, 2012 This booklet summarizes the report of the U.S. Antarctic Program Blue Ribbon Panel, More and Better Science in Antarctica Through Increased Logistical Effectiveness. The report was completed at the request of the White House office of science and Technology Policy and the National Science Foundation. Copies of the full report may be obtained from David Friscic at [email protected] (phone: 703-292-8030). An electronic copy of the report may be downloaded from http://www.nsf.gov/ od/opp/usap_special_review/usap_brp/rpt/index.jsp. Cover art by Zina Deretsky. Front and back inside covers showing McMurdo’s Dry Valleys in Antarctica provided by Craig Dorman. CONTENTS Introduction ............................................ 1 The Panel ............................................... 2 Overall Assessment ................................. 3 U.S. Facilities in Antarctica ....................... 4 The Environmental Challenge .................... 7 Uncertainties in Logistics Planning ............. 8 Activities of Other Nations ....................... 9 Economic Considerations ....................... 10 Major Issues ......................................... 11 Single-Point Failure Modes ..................... 17 Recommendations ................................. 18 Concluding Observations ....................... 21 U.S. ANTARCTIC PROGRAM BLUE RIBBON PANEL WASHINGTON,
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Airlift, 1968 Elsner and Gerald L
    olivine-rich intrusive is dominant in the westernmost part of the mountains. In the east, a small isolated outcrop consisted of sedimentary rocks in a sequence of about 50 m, containing a fossil Glosopteris flora of Permian age. All mountains were crossed by do- lerite sills and dykes. Astronomical observations of the sun and stars were made to get an exact location of the mountains; for elevation estimation, a series of pressure readings will be compared with contemporaneous ones from SANAE and Halley Bay. Measurements of the mag- netic field were also made. During work in the moun- tains, animal and plant life were observed, and some samples were taken. In January, the glaciologist travelled 70 km north to the ice shelf, where a snow pit was dug and core drillings were made in order to compare the condi- tions there to those at the main base. Facilitated by favorable conditions, the work was finished ahead of schedule. Owing to coarse sastrugi and soft snow, the LC-130 aircraft experienced difficulty in becoming airborne, but succeeded after climbing up a slope and taking off downhill. After a day at the South Pole Station, it arrived at McMurdo Station on January Kraul Mountains 20. Weddell seals being conducted by Drs. Robert W. Animal Airlift, 1968 Elsner and Gerald L. Kooyman at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, and navigational studies on Adélie K. N. MOULTON penguins being conducted by Dr. Richard L. Penney of the New York Zoological Society. To utilize fully Office of Antarctic Programs the airlift capabilities of the C-141, the National National Science Foundation Science Foundation agreed to fulfill several requests from zoological parks and arrange for the return During the early morning hours of December 2, of Adélie and emperor penguins as well as south polar 1968, a (J-141 Starlifter, presently the largest trans- skuas for the Detroit, Cincinnati, St.
    [Show full text]
  • Immediate Scientific Report of the Ross Sea Iceberg Project 1987-88
    SCIENCE AND RESEARCH INTERNAL REPORT 9 IMMEDIATE SCIENTIFIC REPORT OF THE ROSS SEA ICEBERG PROJECT 1987-88 by J.R. Keys and A.D.W. Fowler* This is an unpublished report and must not be cited or reproduced in whole or part without permission from the Director, Science and Research. It should be cited as Science and Research Internal Report No.9 (unpublished). Science and Research Directorate, Department of Conservation, P.O. Box 10 420 Wellington, New Zealand April 1988 *Division of Information Technology, DSIR, Lower Hutt. 1 Frontispiece. NOAA 9 infrared satellite image of the 160 km long mega-giant iceberg B-9 on 9 November, four weeks after separating from the eastern front of Ross Ice Shelf. The image was digitized by US Navy scientists at McMurdo Station, paid for by the US National Science Foundation and supplied by the Antarctic Research Center at Scripps Institute. Several other bergs up to 20 km long that calved at the same time can be seen between B-9 and the ice shelf. These bergs have since drifted as far west as Ross Island (approx 600 km) whereas B-9 has moved only 215 km by 13 April, generally in a west-north-west direction. 2 CONTENTS Frontispiece 1 Contents page 2 SUMMARY 3 INTRODUCTION 4 PROPOSED PROGRAMME 5 ITINERARY 6 SCIENTIFIC ACHIEVEMENTS RNZAF C-130 iceberg monitoring flight 6 SPOT satellite image and concurrent aerial Photography 8 Ground-based fieldwork 9 B-9 iceberg 11 CONCLUSION 13 FUTURE RESEARCH 13 PUBLICATIONS 14 Acknowledgenents 14 References 14 FIGURES 15 TABLES 20 3 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Living and Working at USAP Facilities
    Chapter 6: Living and Working at USAP Facilities CHAPTER 6: Living and Working at USAP Facilities McMurdo Station is the largest station in Antarctica and the southermost point to which a ship can sail. This photo faces south, with sea ice in front of the station, Observation Hill to the left (with White Island behind it), Minna Bluff and Black Island in the distance to the right, and the McMurdo Ice Shelf in between. Photo by Elaine Hood. USAP participants are required to put safety and environmental protection first while living and working in Antarctica. Extra individual responsibility for personal behavior is also expected. This chapter contains general information that applies to all Antarctic locations, as well as information specific to each station and research vessel. WORK REQUIREMENT At Antarctic stations and field camps, the work week is 54 hours (nine hours per day, Monday through Saturday). Aboard the research vessels, the work week is 84 hours (12 hours per day, Monday through Sunday). At times, everyone may be expected to work more hours, assist others in the performance of their duties, and/or assume community-related job responsibilities, such as washing dishes or cleaning the bathrooms. Due to the challenges of working in Antarctica, no guarantee can be made regarding the duties, location, or duration of work. The objective is to support science, maintain the station, and ensure the well-being of all station personnel. SAFETY The USAP is committed to safe work practices and safe work environments. There is no operation, activity, or research worth the loss of life or limb, no matter how important the future discovery may be, and all proactive safety measures shall be taken to ensure the protection of participants.
    [Show full text]
  • Flnitflrclid
    flNiTflRClID A NEWS BULLETIN published quarterly by the NEW ZEALAND ANTARCTIC SOCIETY (INC) A New Zealand geochemist, Dr W. F. Giggenbach, descends into the inner crater of Mt Erebus on December 23 last year in an unsuccessful attempt to take gas samples. Behind him in the lava lake of the volcano where the temperature is 1000deg Celsius. On his rucksack he carries titanium gas sampling rods. Photo by Colin Monteath VOl. 8, NO. 1 1 . Wellington, New Zealand, as a magazine. o6pt61*11061% I 979I ' . SOUTH SANDWICH Is SOUTH GEORGIA f S O U T H O R K N E Y I s x \ *#****t ■ /o Orcadas arg \ - aanae s» Novolazarevskaya ussr XJ FALKLAND Is /*Signyl.uK ,,'\ V\60-W / -'' \ Syowa japan SOUTH AMERICA /'' /^ y Borga 7 s a "Molodezhnaya A SOUTH , .a /WEDDELL T\USSR SHETLAND DRONNING MAUD LAND ENOERBY \] / Halley Bay^ ununn n mMUU / I s 'SEA uk'v? COATS Ld LAND JJ Druzhnaya ^General Belgrano arg ANTARCTIC %V USSR *» -» /\ ^ Mawson MAC ROBERTSON LANO\ '■ aust /PENINSULA,' "*■ (see map below) /Sohral arg _ ■ = Davis aust /_Siple — USA Amundsen-Scott / queen MARY LAND gMirny [ELLSWORTH u s a / ; t h u s s i " LANO K / ° V o s t o k u s s r / k . MARIE BYRD > LAND WILKES LAND Scott kOSS|nzk SEA I ,*$V /VICTORIA TERRE ' •|Py»/ LAND AOEilE ,y Leningradskaya X' USSR,''' \ 1 3 -------"';BALLENYIs ANTARCTIC PENINSULA ^ v . : 1 Teniente Matienzo arg 2 Esperanza arc 3 Almirante Brown arg 4 Petrel arg 5 Decepcion arg 6 Vicecomodoro Marambio arg ' ANTARCTICA 7 Arturo Prat chile 8 Bernardo O'Higgins chile 1000 Miles 9 Presidents Frei chile * ? 500 1000 Kilometres 10 Stonington I.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Plan for Antarctic Specially Managed Area (ASPA) No
    Management Plan for Antarctic Specially Managed Area (ASPA) No. 137 NORTHWEST WHITE ISLAND, McMURDO SOUND (167° 20' E, 78° 00' S) 1 Description of values to be protected An area of 150 km2 of coastal shelf ice on the northwest side of White Island was originally designated by Recommendation XIII-8 (1985, SSSI No. 18) after a proposal by the United States of America on the grounds that this locality contains an unusual breeding population of Weddell seals (Leptonychotes weddellii) which is the most southerly known, and which has been physically isolated from other populations by advance of the McMurdo Ice Shelf and Ross Ice Shelf. The original boundaries have been adjusted in the current plan in light of recent data recording the spatial distribution of the seals on the ice shelves. In the south, the boundary of the Area has been shifted north and east to exclude the region north of White Strait where no observations of the seals have been recorded. In the north, the Area has been extended to encompass an additional part of the Ross Ice Shelf in order to ensure inclusion of more of the region within which the seals may be found. The Area is now approximately 130 km2. The colony appears unable to relocate to another area because of its distance from the open ocean of McMurdo Sound, and as such is highly vulnerable to any human impacts that might occur in the vicinity. Year-round studies have detected no evidence of immigration or emigration of seals from the population, which appears to have grown to around 25 to 30 animals from a population of around 11 in the 1960s.
    [Show full text]
  • Mcmurdo Station, Antarctica MASTER PLAN for WORLD’S COLDEST AIRPORT
    McMurdo Station, Antarctica MASTER PLAN FOR WORLD’S COLDEST AIRPORT Ty C. Sander, PE Vice President & Aviation Group Manager (BSCE ‘98) Andrew J. Bodine, PE, CM Project Manager (BSCE ‘11) Overview 1. Antarctica 2. Air Operations in Antarctica 3. Single Airfield Complex Master Plan Similar But Different • Air Passenger Terminal Similar But Different • Air Passenger Terminal Similar But Different • Air Passenger Terminal Antarctica: A Place of Extremes • Coldest • Driest • Windiest • Least Inhabited • Most Isolated • Harshest Antarctica: A Place of Extremes 5.4M Sq. Miles Antarctica: A Place of Extremes • 98% Ice Covered • 70% World’s Fresh Water • 6,000 ft Thick Why Antarctica? SCIENCE Unique Species Why Antarctica? SCIENCE Unique Species Why Antarctica? SCIENCE Unique Geology Why Antarctica? SCIENCE Unique Climate Why Antarctica? SCIENCE Unique Environment Antarctica Development • National Science Foundation – USAP – McMurdo 1955 • Farthest South Accessible by ship National Science Foundation (NSF) Operations US Stations: • Palmer • McMurdo • South Pole NSF Cycle of Operations at McMurdo • Austral Winter • Nearly 6 months of darkness • Skeleton Crew (~150) • Limited Maintenance/ Construction • No Transport Apr-Aug NSF Cycle of Operations at McMurdo Sep: Winfly Oct-Nov: Major Influx Dec-Jan: Peak Population 1,300 Continent 1,000 @ McMurdo Feb-Mar: Northern Migration Why Air Operations in Antarctica? Limited Options Sea transport 2 ships per year: Cargo, Fuel Led in by icebreaker Why Air Operations in Antarctica? • Land transport – No paved
    [Show full text]
  • Andrill Mcmurdo Ice Shelf Project
    ANDRILL MCMURDO ICE SHELF PROJECT SCIENTIFIC PROSPECTUS image courtesy Josh Landis and the National Science Foundation ANDRILL CONTRIBUTION 4 ANDRILL ISBN: 0-9723550-1-4 Additional copies of this report and other information regarding ANDRILL are available from: ANDRILL Science Management Office 126 Bessey Hall University of Nebraska – Lincoln Lincoln, NE 68588-0341 Phone: 1 + (402) 472-6723 Fax: 1 + (402) 472-6724 Please visit our website at http://andrill.org ANDRILL McMurdo Ice Shelf Project Scientific Prospectus TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. SUMMARY 1 2. THE ANDRILL PROGRAM: BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW 2 2.1 The McMurdo Sound Portfolio of Stratigraphic Drilling Objectives 3 3. McMURDO ICE SHELF PROJECT 4 3.1 Introduction 4 3.2 Regional Tectonic and Stratigraphic Setting 6 3.3 Site Survey and a Stratigraphic Interpretation of Target Interval 7 3.3.1 Seismic Stratigraphy 7 3.3.2 Seismic Stratigraphic Interpretation and Age Relationships: A Prognosis for ANDRILL Drilling 8 3.3.3 Faulting and Deformation 9 3.3.4 Bathymetry 9 3.3.5 Oceanography 10 3.3.6 Seafloor and Shallow Sub-seafloor Stratigraphy 10 3.4 Towards a Glacial-Interglacial Depositional Model 11 3.5 Chronostratigraphy 12 4. SCIENTIFIC OBJECTIVES 12 4.1 Overview 12 4.2 Key Climatic Questions to be Addressed 13 5. THE SCIENCE TEAM 14 6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 15 7. REFERENCES 15 Co-Chief Scientists - - Tim Naish1,2 and Ross Powell3 1Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences P. O. Box 303068, Lower Hutt, New Zealand. 2Antarctic Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington P. O. Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand e-mail: [email protected] phone: 64-4-570-4767 3Department of Geology and Environmental Geosciences 312 Davis Hall, Normal Rd, Northern Illinois University De Kalb, IL 60115-2854, U.S.A.
    [Show full text]