Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T22:17:02.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Survey on Polar Expeditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

John Wright
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Most of the major problems of Arctic geography have been solved, and there are now few stretches of coastline which have not been at least roughly mapped. In the Antarctic there are still huge blank spaces on the map, but even there the kind of rough and ready maps that were made by early explorers would now be scarcely adequate. A modern polar survey must be much more accurate and comprehensive if it is to be worth while and have any permanent value, and it therefore takes up rather more of the time which used to be almost entirely devoted to travel. On the other hand, modern inventions such as the light but accurate eyepiece reading theodolite, the camera, and the aeroplane, have made available very much more rapid methods of survey than were possible even twenty years ago.

Type
Article
Information
Polar Record , Volume 3 , Issue 18 , July 1939 , pp. 144 - 168
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1939

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ahlmann, H. W. Results of the Swedish-Norwegian Arctic expedition in the summer of 1931. Part iii. Geografiska Annaler, 1933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Debenham, F.Report on the Maps and Survey Results of the British Antarctic Expedition 1910–13. London, 1923.Google Scholar
Harland, W. B. Design for a sledge-wheel. The Polar Record, 1939, No. 17, p. 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, J. P. Survey of North East Greenland. Meddelelser om Gronland, 1917, Bd. xlvi, p. 79.Google Scholar
Lindsay, M.The British Trans-Greenland expedition. Appendices i–ii. Geog. Journ. 1935, Vol. lxxxvi, p. 235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, K. M.The stereographic survey of the Shaksgam. Geog. Journ. 1927, Vol. lxx, p. 342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meiklejohn, I. F. The use of wireless equipment by expeditions. The Polar Record, 1939, No. 17, pp. 19–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nørlund, N. E. and Spender, M. A.Some methods and procedure developed during recent expeditionary surveys in South-east Greenland. Geog. Journ. 1935, Vol. lxxxvi, p. 317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quervain, A. de and Mercanton, P. L. Rcsultats Scientifiques de l'Exp´dition Suisse au Groenland, 1912–13. Meddelelser om Gronland, 1925, Bd. lix, Nr. 5, pp. 70–112.Google Scholar
Reeves, E. A.Hints to Travellers, Vol. i. 11th Edition.London, 1935.Google Scholar
Spender, M. A. Map-making during the expedition. Meddelelser out, Gronland, 1933, Bd. civ, Nr. 2.Google Scholar
Spender, M. A.Photographic surveys in the Mount Everest region. Geog. Journ. 1936, Vol. lxxxviii, p. 289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spender, M. A.Appendix i to the Shaksgam expedition, by Eric Shipton. Geog. Journ. 1938, Vol. xci, p. 331.Google Scholar
Spender, M. A.The Watts-Lcica photo-theodolite. Himalayan Journ. 1939, Vol. ix, p. 175.Google Scholar
Stephenson, A.The British Arctic Air Route expedition. Appendix iv, Survey. Geog. Journ. 1932, Vol. lxxix, p. 488.Google Scholar
Stephenson, A.Notes on the scientific work of the British Graham Land expedition 1934–37. Survey. Geog. Journ. 1938, Vol. xci, p. 513.Google Scholar
Wright, J. W.Methods of survey in North East Lund. Geog. Journ. 1939, Vol. xciii, p. 210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar