Hello again, dear
reader.
In our recent
conversations we have been talking about explorers and adventure and all the
various aspects of exploring and adventuring from how to prepare food. And even
how to entertain yourself or small children on the journey to your adventure
destination. However for today's conversation, I thought we would discuss what
the explorers of the past can teach us, dear reader, about setting and
achieving any goals you set for yourself dear reader. I thought to better
understand how to accomplish these goals. We would examine the observational
and practical skills displayed by the Arctic explorers in the early 1900s as
starting in 1910. Arctic exploration (or more specifically, the quest to become
the first person to reach the South Pole) was the equivalent of the space race
in nearly 1960s. All of these explorers such as Ernest Shackleton and Robert
falcon Scott were experts at devising plans and procedures to help them
accomplish their goals, and so I thought dear reader, that you could use some
of these planning methods to not only understand the methods and mindset
necessary to be a great explorer, but also how these methods and exploration
mindset can help you achieve all of your most important life goals...
In 1910, two explorers
began their quests to become the first men to ever set foot upon the
southernmost point on earth.
It was the “Heroic Age
of Antarctic Exploration,” and the South Pole represented one of the last
unexplored areas on earth. Robert Falcon Scott hoped to claim the bottom of the
world for England; Roald Amundsen wished to plant the Norwegian flag there on
behalf of his countrymen.
Despite their common
goal, the two adventurers’ approaches to their expeditions were quite
different—as were the end results. Amundsen reached the South Pole first and
returned home on a trip that was relatively smooth and straightforward. Scott
arrived at 90 Degrees South only to experience the crushing disappointment of
seeing one of Amundsen’s flags flapping in the wind. He would never make it
back; he and his four companions died of starvation, exhaustion, and exposure
as they attempted to make the 700 mile return trip to their base camp.
Some have painted the
differences between the men and their respective expeditions too
simplistically: Amundsen as the brilliant leader, Scott as an utterly
incompetent boob. In truth, both men had strengths and flaws, and both men made
mistakes. And there is much merit in a struggle, even if it ends in tragedy (see the story of Nick Piantanida),
and I personally greatly admire Scott’s courage and character and his stoicism
when facing death.
Make
no mistake about it: Scott and his men had heart and hardihood in spades. But
Amundsen was the superior tactician.
The outcome of any
endeavor is decided by the weights of a scale — on one side lies
fate/risk/circumstance and on the other, preparations/tactics/heart. The
adventurer cannot know exactly how much will be loaded on the luck side of the
scale when he sets out, but he can overload the other side as much as possible,
in hopes of tipping the chances in his favor. This is what Amundsen did, and
how he did it reveals a number of strikingly clear insights into how we too can
reach our goals.
Pioneer Your
Own Path
Amundsen’s
route had never before been taken, but it put his starting point 60 miles
closer to the Pole than Scott’s.
Scott patterned much of
his trek after the Nimrod expedition Ernest Shackleton had undertaken
in 1907, in which he had come within 112 miles of reaching the Pole (but had
also nearly died of starvation on the way back). Scott chose to set up his base
camp at McMurdo Sound, just as the Nimrod and Scott’s own previous
Discovery expedition had done, and he followed the same route to the Pole
Shackleton had taken. Scott carried a record of the Nimrod expedition
throughout his own march and checked his progress every evening against that of
his predecessor.
Amundsen, on the other
hand, made his base camp at the Bay of Whales, setting up his winter quarters
on the edge of the Great Ice Barrier. No explorer had camped at that spot
previously, for it was feared that the ice could fracture and send you floating
away on a berg. But Amundsen had studied the records of past explorers who had
been in the area, and saw that their descriptions of the ice had remained
unchanged for decades, which Amundsen believed pointed to the area’s stability.
Amundsen felt that camping there was a risk worth taking, for it positioned his
starting point 60 miles closer to the Pole than Scott’s, which meant a total
savings of 120 miles round trip. From the Barrier, Amundsen pioneered a route
no man had trod before, and he took the straightest path possible to the Pole,
traveling along a line of longitude. He had no idea what kind of terrain he’d
face en route to his goal, but he was prepared to go up and over it.
As Scott trudged to the
Pole, he found reason to hope that he might arrive there first, for he saw no
sledge tracks or footprints along the way, and he assumed Amundsen would be
using the same established path. What he did not know was that the Norwegian
was on an entirely different course 500 miles to the west and already hundreds
of miles ahead.
Focus on One
Goal at a Time
As you may remember
from our discussion on willpower, picking one
goal to focus on at a time is one of the most effective ways of
conserving this vital inner fuel and ensuring you have enough energy
and motivation to achieve your aim. Not only that, but psychologists tell us
that when you work on more than one goal, and those goals conflict
with each other, your willpower gets sapped even more.
Amundsen had one goal,
and one goal only: to be the first to reach the South Pole.
Dr.
Edward Atkinson, part of Scott’s scientific team. The scientific prong of
Scott’s mission made their expedition more complicated, while Amundsen was able
to focus all of his energy and efforts on being the first to reach the Pole.
Scott’s expedition, on
the other hand, had dual purposes: to get to the Pole first and to
gather scientific information about the Antarctic. These goals were at times in
conflict; to reach the Pole first, time was of the essence, while scientific
work and surveying required slowing down and making careful observations. At
one point during Scott’s return trip from the Pole, he and his four companions
had just five days of food left, with the next depot–a pre-laid cache of food
and supplies–about five days away. The margin between the men and starvation
was thin, and weather conditions were ideal for making up time, but Scott
decided instead to stop and take geological samples–gathering 30 stones, adding
35 pounds to the sledges, and requiring 7-8 miles of work that did not get the
team any closer to the life-saving food waiting at the next depot.
Scott’s desire to
advance scientific knowledge was quite noble and very earnest, and the
information and samples he gathered later proved to be useful to researchers.
And that is of course what makes concentrating on one goal at a time so
difficult; our other goals are worthy ones too, and we want to tackle
everything at once; it’s hard to feel like you’re ignoring something that
should be done. But it would have been better for Scott, and for us, to check
off one thing before moving on to another; Scott was already planning on going
out towards the Pole again once he returned from his first trip anyway; that
trip could have focused exclusively on scientific work, leaving the initial
expedition to be run purely as a race.
While
Scott’s team took nearly 2,000 photographs, Amundsen’s took only ten–and these
only once they’d reached the Pole.
Amundsen’s only
scientific work involved making and recording daily meteorological observations
at his base camp. But he didn’t do any at night, which greatly diminished the
value of even this small contribution. But Amundsen understood the importance
of channeling all of one’s energy into a single aim, saying:
“Our plan is one, one
and again one alone–to reach the pole. For that goal, I have decided to throw
everything else aside. We shall do what we can without colliding with this
plan. If we were to have a night watch, we would have a light burning the whole
time. In one room, as we have, this would be worrying for most of us, and make
us weak. What concerns me is that we all live properly in all respects during
the winter. Sleep and eat well, so that we have full strength and are in good
spirits when spring arrives to fight towards the goal which we must attain at
any cost.”
Work Smarter,
Not Harder
One of the biggest
differences between the Scott and Amundsen expeditions were the forms of
transportation each man chose for their journeys.
Scott gave himself four
different options for transportation: ponies, dogs, motor sledges (primitive
snowmobiles), and man-hauling. The motor sledges—which hadn’t been tested in
Arctic-like conditions—quickly broke down. The ponies were ill-suited to the
climate and the terrain—there’s no naturally growing vegetation to feed them,
they sweat through their hides, which creates sheets of ice on their bodies,
and with heavy torsos and slender legs, they sink deep into the snow with every
step. Thus the ponies made slow and painful process and had to all be put down.
Ponies
can haul heavier loads than dogs, but are ill-suited to Arctic conditions.
They’re vulnerable to the cold, which meant Scott’s men had to build, with
great effort, walls of snow (seen here behind the ponies) each evening to
protect the animals from the freezing wind.
The dogs performed
gamely, but Scott did not feel they were reliable or well-suited for the
crevasse-pocked terrain he would be crossing, and he sent them back to camp
once he had traveled halfway to the Pole. That left three-fourths of the
journey there and back to be completed through man-hauling—getting into a harness
and pulling 200 pound sledges, step by step (sometimes on skis), through the
snow and ice for more than 1,000 miles and a rise of 10,000 feet.
This is what Shackleton
had done on his expedition, and he and other British explorers believed that
man-hauling was the best—and the most noble–way to go.
But among Nordic
peoples, the advantages of using dogs as much as possible was clear. The wisdom
in selecting dogs was confirmed to Amundsen during one of his previous
expeditions, when he had stopped to learn as much about survival in Arctic
conditions as possible from those who knew the landscape most intimately: the
Inuit.
The
logistics of Scott’s expedition were complex; he started out with 16 men, 23
dogs, 10 ponies, 13 sledges, and 2 motor sledges. Since the different forms of
transport varied in speed, they had to each start out at different times from
the camps, so that they’d all arrive near the same time at the next camp. The
party was slowly winnowed down to the five men who man-hauled the rest of the
way to the Pole. In contrast, Amundsen’s expedition was very simple: 5 men and
dogs all the way there, and all the way back.
Dogs were low
maintenance haulers—they could be fed a variety of foods (including each
other), and they kept themselves warm by digging holes to crawl inside. They
also made great companions—breaking up the morale-sapping monotony of trudging
through freezing wind and bleak, faceless terrain with the same four other guys
for 1500 miles. And of course they were quick and fast, scampering over the
snow and taking the burden of hauling off the men; Scott often marched 9-10
hours a day, while Amundsen rarely went more than 5-6, and yet in that shorter
amount of time, he would sometimes cover twice the ground Scott had. Finally,
because dogs can travel in colder conditions, they can run both earlier and
later in the summer season than ponies, allowing Amundsen to start for the Pole
two weeks before Scott—a huge advantage.
The
British believed man-hauling was the most reliable way to travel in the
Antarctic, and the purity of it made it a source of pride.
For the British,
man-hauling was a source of pride, a test of manhood—they liked the purity of
it, the struggle between man and nature; Scott and his men actually looked
forward to turning back the dogs and getting into the harnesses for the push to
the Pole. Scott wrote:
“In my mind no journey
ever made with dogs can approach the height of that fine conception which is
realised when a party of men go forth to face hardships, dangers, and difficulties
with their own unaided efforts…Surely in this case the conquest is more nobly
and splendidly won.”
I do admire something
of that attitude myself. But while all struggles require some effort and grit,
the most painful way, does not always equal the best way.
Successful Men
Make Their Own Luck, or Failing to Prepare is Preparing to Fail
“I may say that this is
the greatest factor—the way in which the expedition is equipped—the way in
which every difficulty is foreseen, and precautions taken for meeting or
avoiding it. Victory awaits him who has everything in order — luck, people
call it. Defeat is certain for him who has neglected to take the necessary
precautions in time; this is called bad luck.” -Roald Amundsen
Preparation. This is
where the rubber really hit the road for Amundsen and Scott.
It’s not that Scott
didn’t prepare. He did. But he based his preparations on the conditions he had
experienced on his previous Discovery expedition and on those reported
during Shackleton’s Nimrod expedition. He didn’t count on Antarctica
being unpredictable, and left only a thin margin for error, a small buffer
against accident or inclement weather. He didn’t prepare for the worst. And yet
that was what he ended up facing—freezing temperatures that only come around
every couple of decades or so and powerful blizzards.
Amundsen
spent years planning his expedition and went over the details again and again.
For his part, Amundsen
left nothing to chance. He designed his own goggles, skis, dog harnesses, and
pemmican. For the members of his team he chose men who were good with their
hands, and as they waited out the winter at their base camp in preparation for
the start of the expedition, Amundsen expected them to work 9-5, six days a
week honing their equipment and clothing, and getting all their plans and gear
shipshape.
Although
Scott and Amundsen bought the same model of sledges, skilled Norwegian
carpenter Olav Bjaaland worked in the winter to shave off 2/3 of the sledges’
weight without compromising their sturdiness.
The men made a series
of tunnels and snow caves and turned them into what Amundsen called, “just one
big workshop,” in which they crafted two pairs of custom skis for each man (one
pair for back-up), modified the skis’ bindings to be more efficient,
created better designed and lighter tents (Amundsen’s tents could be put up
with one pole; Scott’s required five), lightened the sledges, and sewed their
clothing and remade their boots four times until they fit perfectly and
wouldn’t chafe.
Scott’s
sledges were overloaded, unwieldy, and prone to tipping over. His supplies and
containers had to be lashed on the sledge, and then every time they made camp,
unlashed, removed, opened, and then relished back on the sledge, eating up
perhaps a half hour of their time each day.
Amundsen
designed his boxes with lids built into the top like tea canisters; when the
Norwegians pulled into camp, they could keep their boxes lashed on the sledges
and just had to pop the lid off, grab what they needed, and put the top back in
place—leaving more time for resting in their sleeping bags. A hack definitely
worthy of Lifehacker – Antarctic Explorer Edition.
All of Amundsen’s
equipment was field-tested at base camp and refined again and again. Amundsen
saw all this tinkering and crafting as having two invaluable benefits: 1) the
gear turned out much better than those mass-produced, and 2) having had a hand
in making it, the men were much more confident in how the gear would perform
out on the march.
The
canisters of paraffin fuel that both men took on their expeditions were known
to have leaking problems. Amundsen soldered the canisters shut, while Scott
kept the standard leather washers. On their return from the Pole, Scott and his
men were dismayed to reach their depots, only to discover that much of the
paraffin had evaporated, forcing them to eat frozen food and leading to
dehydration (they didn’t have enough fuel to melt the snow). One of Amundsen’s
canisters was found in the snow 50 years later–still 100% full.
Scott’s men did refine
their equipment somewhat during the winter, but spent a good deal of the time
writing letters, playing sports, and attending evening lectures given by each
other.
Amundsen brought the
same attention to detail he had given his equipment to one of the most crucial
parts of his preparation: the positioning of the depots on the way to and from
the Pole. Because the men could not carry all the supplies and food they’d need
for a 1500 mile journey on the sledges, depots were placed at intervals along
the route before the actual expedition began. Amundsen had spent a year
creating a depot-laying plan for the expedition, and still felt it had not been
enough time. He laid out his depots with regularity, along each line of
latitude, and packed them with ten times more food (and including 42,000
biscuits) than Scott’s. While Scott and his men died partially from starvation,
Amundsen’s team actually gained weight on their return from the Pole.
Scott
did plan, but he was unprepared for the unexpectedly cold temperatures he and
his team would face, and their slower than expected progress.
Scott hatched his
depot-laying plan once he landed at McMurdo Sound and gave his men just a week
to divvy up the supplies and calculate how much to stash at each depot. The
depots ended up containing enough food to sustain the men, but just barely.
Man-hauling has been estimated to burn 7,000 calories a day, and even up to a
11,000 when pulling uphill. Yet each man’s rations provided just 4,500 calories
a day, leaving them weakened and demoralized.
And since the depots
contained just a little extra fuel and food beyond what the men would need if
they arrived on schedule, even if the men needed rest or could not make much
progress in the weather, they had to keep pushing on to make it to the next
cache of supplies; they often arrived at each depot by the skin of their teeth,
with only a half day of food and fuel left.
Because
finding each depot was so vital, and because it can be easy to get off track in
a wasteland of ice and snow, especially when thick fog and blizzards cut your
visibility, Amundsen placed a line of ten black flags, spaced a half mile
apart, on both sides of his depots. If the men got within a few miles of the
depot, they would run into one of the flags, and each flag was marked with its
distance to and direction from the next depot. Scott marked his depots was just
a single flag.
But perhaps Scott’s
greatest depot-laying mistake concerned the placement of “One Ton Depot.”
During the depot-laying march before the main expedition began, the furthest
depot was supposed to be laid at the 80th parallel. But the men were
tired and the ponies were floundering, and Scott decided to drop the remaining
supplies (2,200 lbs of them, or about one ton) right where they were, 37 miles
shy of the target. This decision would prove fateful. On their return from the
Pole, Scott and his hungry and exhausted men laid down to die just 12 miles
from One Ton Depot. Had it been placed as originally planned, the men would
have reached it, and perhaps have been saved.
I
was always dear reader, thanks for listening, and there will be more to come
soon.
Ben Franklin said "By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail." It seems as if Scott did plan a bit, but he failed to consider all the possible problems he might encounter. I think we can all learn from his mistakes. It's a good lesson for us to take away as much information from our failures as from our successes. As always, another great and interesting blog.
ReplyDelete